« Brooklyn Food & Drink Round-Up House of the Day: 433 Pacific Street »

May 6, 2009

Co-op of the Day: 11 Garden Place

This co-op at 11 Garden Place just hit the market with an asking price of $2,250,000. The lower duplex in a 25-foot-wide townhouse, the apartment has wonderful sense of scale and lots of old-world charm. We also are digging the rear addition with its many-windowed kitchen and dining area. Still, that asking price is far from a lay-up in this market. Time will tell.
11 Garden Place [Brown Harris Stevens] GMAP P*Shark

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/9621

Comments

2 mil plus? Gotta be kidding. Knock several hundred thou off that.

Posted by: denton at May 6, 2009 12:47 PM

That's about $1200/square foot. 1.8 gets it sold.

Posted by: DeLepp at May 6, 2009 12:49 PM

This is a great apt - gorgeous, spacious nice layout etc, great location

but 2.2mil plus $1800 CC - huh? You have to ask yourself,do these sellers really have to sell...now?

Posted by: gemini10 at May 6, 2009 12:50 PM

It's lovely, but you can buy an entire townhouse for that price in Park Slope. And strangely enough, there doesn't seem to be access to the garden, just "views" of the garden. Is it a shared garden of some kind?

Posted by: Park Sloper at May 6, 2009 12:51 PM

I calculated (roughly) 1,600 sq. ft. so $1,400 psf which is way too high.

BROKER...PEOPLE WANT TO SEE BATH AND KITCHEN PICS. DID YOU JUST START THAT JOB????

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 12:52 PM

"Feels like a house," she writes, but it ain't which is why you pay monthly what a townhouse in many parts of Brooklyn pay annually. INSANE! True, it is huge and beautiful, but you're still paying two arms and two legs to sleep on the ground floor. I say chop off 1,000,000 and then just maybe you'll have some action.

Posted by: househunt at May 6, 2009 12:54 PM

Oh for the love of god!
right - I got caught up with the airy layout that I didnt even notice the lack of kitchen/bathroom shots

yeah - is the garden exclusive to this unit or is it shared?

Posted by: gemini10 at May 6, 2009 12:55 PM

Agree with Dave, no kitchen and bath pics? First day at the rodeo?

Also, Why spend this much for a part of a house when you can get a single family for that price? Stupid.

..anyone else scared of small co-ops? Particularly in this economic climate?

As far as the pics that are shown- Gorgeous. Still doesn't outweigh the negatives.

Posted by: TownhouseLady at May 6, 2009 12:57 PM

Love garden place. I'd be happy to live in this place.

I have no idea about prices. Are things selling? I really only see the Grey Gardens of Brooklyn selling these days. Also, I see some smaller co-ops selling -- probably going to first time buyers.. Brownstoner, I'd love to see a follow up on these co-ops of the day.

(I see access to the garden from both levels)

Posted by: Ringo at May 6, 2009 12:57 PM

yippee...we made it for three full comments before a park slope comparison was made

Posted by: Park Dope at May 6, 2009 12:58 PM

Ad said garden was private to the apt. Though broker-speak is different from comprehensible english.

Posted by: DeLepp at May 6, 2009 12:59 PM

what on earth is that crazy maintenance going towards?! your upstairs neighbor's mortgage?

Posted by: funkymonkey at May 6, 2009 12:59 PM

For 2 apts, why would maintenance be a combined $3700? Who need to spend $3700 per month for upkeep on a home? Someone is fleecing

Posted by: PropJoe at May 6, 2009 1:00 PM

TWO AND A QUARTER MILLION FOR THIS???????

Are you fucking kidding me?

Posted by: lechacal at May 6, 2009 1:00 PM

> "..anyone else scared of small co-ops? Particularly in this economic climate?"

Oh yeah.

There's not a chance on God's green earth that I would be part of a co-op this small.

Not that a tony place like this would accept a rapscallion like myself.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at May 6, 2009 1:02 PM

Re: small coops: If I live in this apartment the other unit(s) had better be occupied either by 1. Good, trusted friends or 2. tenants.

Posted by: lechacal at May 6, 2009 1:03 PM

Gabriel Byrne lives on this street. Does it come with free therapy? I'm severely confusing him with his In Treatment role, but I think it's worth a try.

Posted by: lucille at May 6, 2009 1:03 PM

seriously, folks, someone has to explain the $1,800 monthly nut for maintenance. this is a 2-unit space, right?

Posted by: Fjorder at May 6, 2009 1:06 PM

Not in love at all. The pictures make the place look a bit tired and dark, except for the living room. The bedrooms look depressing and cramped. I'm sure they aren't in real life, so I think the listing agent should make a better effort for her share of the spoils.
It's also crazy expensive. Is this apartment really worth a $500,000 downpayment for the privilege to pay $12,000 a month?

Posted by: Maly at May 6, 2009 1:06 PM

gorgeous apartment, great layout, 3 bedrooms two and a half baths. very civilized. I say it goes for 2.2 million. Who would not love this if they have the money? This block is not for folks looking to economize on housing costs.

Posted by: sam at May 6, 2009 1:06 PM

well, I hate to sound like a broken record on maintenance issues, but you can't tell much from the number alone. it pays for heat, taxes, upkeep, new windows, new roof, cornice repair, facade repair, snow removal and all that crap. but more importantly, if the building has a large reserve fund, you are buying into that. So if the reserve fund is 100k, this maintenance is a deal. If the reserve fund is 10k and the building needs repairs, it's a loser. Either way, without more info, it's impossible to say.

Posted by: Ringo at May 6, 2009 1:09 PM

> "This block is not for folks looking to economize on housing costs."

Agreed. So why economize by sharing a house when you could probably, given the mortgage and maintenance costs, buy a whole house for yourself? Or buy an apartment in a full service building? Not seeing the economics of this one.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at May 6, 2009 1:14 PM

12k a month and the opportunity cost on a 500k down payment; all to live like a CHUD. Not to mention an 1800/mo skim to the toffs upstairs. An absolute joke.

Posted by: Whuh at May 6, 2009 1:20 PM

best block in the heights, half a brownstone. should cost half of a brownstone's cost. 2.2+

Posted by: bklynite at May 6, 2009 1:20 PM

you couldn't buy a whole house on garden place for this price.

Posted by: Ringo at May 6, 2009 1:23 PM

$2.25 million to share a house. Nope.

Posted by: East New York at May 6, 2009 1:24 PM

I think the broker needs to get on here and explain an accounting of the monthly CCs and what the co-op balance sheet looks like

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 1:25 PM

Why are the common charges so freakin' high? Do you get a personal indentured servant once you close?

Posted by: dirty_hipster at May 6, 2009 1:28 PM

"best block in the heights, half a brownstone. should cost half of a brownstone's cost."

Half a dog isn't worth as much as a full dog.

Posted by: northsloperenter at May 6, 2009 1:29 PM

"I think the broker needs to get on here and explain an accounting of the monthly CCs and what the co-op balance sheet looks like"

Yeah broker - we know you're reading. Please clarify the common charges at least, as you seemed to have forgotton to take pictures of the kitchen/bathrooms

Posted by: dirty_hipster at May 6, 2009 1:30 PM

"well, I hate to sound like a broken record on maintenance issues,"

Yeah, me too, but $22,000 a year is a heck of a lot of maintenance.

If the building is that expensive to maintain each year, then it is worth less money.

Posted by: northsloperenter at May 6, 2009 1:31 PM

Why does anyone owe you an explanation of their balance sheet DIBS? So you can make a good guess for a price widget? On a property you're never going to buy?

I sometimes think entitlement issues go a little far on this board.

Posted by: Ringo at May 6, 2009 1:32 PM

Three bedrooms. Two baths. On Garden Place.

Rent it for $3500/mo:

- http://www.bhsbrooklyn.com/detail.asp?id=1005934

Kinda makes this place seem a trifle outlandish, no?

Posted by: SnarkSlope at May 6, 2009 1:33 PM

"Why does anyone owe you an explanation of their balance sheet DIBS? So you can make a good guess for a price widget? On a property you're never going to buy? "

it is common practice to look at a co-ops financials to assess the financial health of a co-op before buying, as you aren't buying property, but shares in the organization.

Posted by: dirty_hipster at May 6, 2009 1:34 PM

Ringo...a buyer gets to see the co-op balance sheet. What's your issue????

WTF are you talking "entitlement"??? You ever owned a condo or a co-op??? Do you know what you need to look out for??

STUPID comment.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 1:35 PM

"STUPID comment."

yea - even the hipster knows that.

Posted by: dirty_hipster at May 6, 2009 1:37 PM

It took me a while to post a comment. When I saw the price I had a heart attack and am slowly being revived.

No offense, but Brooklyn Heights is too damn expensive for what it is. Yeah yeah...I know. It's close to Manhattan and has nice houses and the promenade blah blah blah.
And my point is...so what!

Posted by: bayridgegirl at May 6, 2009 1:38 PM

Just because you can afford a whole house does not necessarily mean you want a whole house, especially if you own a huge place in the country or if you are looking to down-size. This will not sell to regular middle-class folks but to folks who are more affluent than that. It has the feel and privacy of a house but the convenience of a co-op with, I assume, a part-time super, and probably even a managing agent. It is a house on auti-pilot if you have the cash. A pied-a-terre with a garden on Garden Place. Rich.

Posted by: sam at May 6, 2009 1:39 PM

of course you get to see the balance sheet if you're buying. but balance sheets aren't generally discussed on a comment section of a blog like you're asking this broker to do. talk about STUPID! (I can type in caps too! huzzah!)

call the broker if you're interested DIBS. call and report back. go ahead. I remember when you emailed that broker not long ago demanding an explanation about that apartment with access only via a SPIRAL STAIRCASE!!! (except you were wrong, natch). how'd that turn out? did they get right back to you?

Posted by: Ringo at May 6, 2009 1:41 PM

My question is: how would a 2-unit co-op work? One of the units must have the majority of shares, and so effectively has the say. However, it seems to me that this is a worse set-up than a 2-family house (which I used to own). In a two family house where one occupant is the owner and the other a tennant, the roles, responsibilities and benefits are clear. It seems to me that the minority owner in this co-op deal has the worst of all worlds (in terms of living arrangements). You have to put your equity in the place, but you don't get a say in its operations.

Am I wrong on this? Anyone have some insight into this?

Posted by: benson at May 6, 2009 1:45 PM

What is a CHUD?
Anyway, if my budget was 2.2M I would buy the wreck on Warren at for $1.5M, invest 600k to make it look the way I like. Then I could live in the style of someone who spends $12,000 a month in housing costs.

Posted by: Maly at May 6, 2009 1:45 PM

> "No offense, but Brooklyn Heights is too damn expensive for what it is."

Hence my new ad campaign:

Brooklyn Heights.
Close to Manhattan.
Far from interesting.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at May 6, 2009 1:49 PM

The real estate taxes on this are probably very high because it is a co-op in Brooklyn Heights, I would guess probably at least $600 a month for this unit. Then there is the underlying mortgage carrying charges, the water & sewer, insurance, part-time super, accountant, corporation taxes, managing agent (perhaps). And, lest we forget, physical maintenance costs and that is where the monthly carying fees go.

Posted by: sam at May 6, 2009 1:50 PM

"Am I wrong on this? Anyone have some insight into this?"

These small townhouse co-ops have always confused me too Benson.

The only places I've seen common charges this high are expensive co ops in full service buildings and cheaper co ops with underlying land leases - where your money goes to pay the "rent" - but the actual unit is priced accordingly.

Where is this 1,800 a month going?

Posted by: dirty_hipster at May 6, 2009 1:51 PM

Ringo, what's your problem today?? You OTR???

Looks like numerous other posters agreed with me on the co-op financials thing.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 1:52 PM

Perhaps sam.

Posted by: dirty_hipster at May 6, 2009 1:55 PM

I dont get this place. It does seem silly to buy an apartment whose main selling point is you get teh "feel" of living in a brownstone without owning one when you could own one for the same price.

Though I totally see Sam's point that the attraction here would be getting a b-stone feeling without all the maintenance and hastle that goes into owning own.

That said I expected to love this place but find it dark and overly....Victorian. For this type of money I'd want a house with a backyard or a really nice apartment with a view.

Posted by: clintonhillbuyer at May 6, 2009 1:58 PM

sam..I believe it said 0% deductible which is often the lion's share of co-op common charges. That's what makes this one feel especially ridiculous. It's a newly formed co-op I suspect and perhaps they need to build a cusion, which is fine, as long as its stated and there's a schedule for downsizing the charges.

Comments, Ringo??????

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 1:58 PM

Nice place, absurd price. NFW.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at May 6, 2009 2:00 PM

I agree with those posters who say that you can't own a whole brownstone for this price ON THIS STREET. But you could not so far away from here. And, sam's probably right. It appeals to people who don't want the hassle of their own building.

Is that OK, Ringo???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 2:00 PM

A house on Garden Place might very well be in the $20k-$40k range a year on RE taxes (buildings on Remsen between Henry and Clinton are right around $24k a year, taxes go up as you get closer to the water). Right there is 1 unit's yearly maintenance.

I would never buy, but as someone said, if you have the cash and you want the "house" feel with the benefits of a super, managing agent, et al, then this is a good spot. If you want a full house you buy a full house. A float for every boat as they say.

Posted by: christopher at May 6, 2009 2:06 PM

The 0% deductiblilty is wrong. This place pays $17K in taxes a year.

Posted by: DeLepp at May 6, 2009 2:10 PM

My bad the bldg pays 17K taxes a year.

Posted by: DeLepp at May 6, 2009 2:11 PM

"Just because you can afford a whole house does not necessarily mean you want a whole house, especially if you own a huge place in the country or if you are looking to down-size. This will not sell to regular middle-class folks but to folks who are more affluent than that. It has the feel and privacy of a house but the convenience of a co-op with, I assume, a part-time super, and probably even a managing agent. It is a house on auti-pilot if you have the cash. A pied-a-terre with a garden on Garden Place. Rich."

OK Sam, I'll ask you as a follow-up to my question above. What is the benefit of owning a minority share in a 2-unit coop versus just renting a similiar place? If a person is rich, then they can afford a high-end rental, tapping into the interest on their capital. Moreover, they don't have to tie up their capital in an asset that is likely over-priced, and with little prospect of appreciation (at least in the near-term). They don't have to put their capital into a corporation in which they effectively have no say. Finally, in a rental, they will get the services that you mention.

I just don't see the sense, in any way, of a 2 unit coop. I can dig a 4 or 5 unit situation, but this is just unworkable, IMHO.

Posted by: benson at May 6, 2009 2:12 PM

Yes, the RE taxes are very high here, though cheap compared to a comparable property in Manhattan.

I'd love to see the per population amounts that BH folks pay in RE taxes as compared to those living esewhere like Ft greene or Bed Stuy. I bet many would be very surprised.

RE taxes per sq ft in differing locations would be interesting to look at too. The economics change so much within just 2-3 miles of different places throughout Brooklyn.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 2:13 PM

It cannot be 0% deductible, that is a typo. In a condo one pays the real estate taxes separate from the maintenance fee but in a coop, the corporation pays the taxes so it is part of the maintenance.

Posted by: sam at May 6, 2009 2:13 PM

does OTR mean "on the rag"?

aaaaaaaaand ... just like that I know I'm at the wrong party. good luck guys.

Posted by: Ringo at May 6, 2009 2:14 PM

and the disgusting few on this blog scare off yet another one. i can't believe more of you don't stand up to dave. he is a bully and a 1st class ahole.

Posted by: swine_flu at May 6, 2009 2:22 PM

I forgot that common harges also include heating fuel costs and of course the electric usage for the hallways and common elements.
I agree that small co-ops are iffy, but somehow I think they are much less iffy on this street.
I tend to agree that Brooklyn Heights is too expensive for what it is but can't you make the same assertion of all of brownstone brooklyn?
At least the Heights has great transportation, great schools and is pretty as a picture.

Posted by: sam at May 6, 2009 2:22 PM

swine flu..Ringo attacked me first.

You typically never add anything to a discussion.

Discuss the property or STFU, Jackass.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 2:26 PM

Dave, your comment was just gross. What happened to trying to maintain some civility?

Posted by: Miss Muffett at May 6, 2009 2:27 PM

I've said this before, but I'll say it again: no way am I paying brownstone prices for the "privilege" of owning a duplex in Brooklyn Heights.

SnarkSlope, I like your Brooklyn Heights slogan. :)

Posted by: cwbuecheler at May 6, 2009 2:27 PM

There were a few condo conversions in Carroll Gardens where duplexes in brownstones sold for 2 million and did not look as good as this. It is a lot of money, high maintenance but a great street and there has always been a premium on BH.

Posted by: carroll2stones at May 6, 2009 2:27 PM

i know not everyone wants a house but it's still hard for me to wrap my head around 2.5M for half a brownstone. BH is lovely but this is a bit much.

Posted by: bkny at May 6, 2009 2:27 PM

MM...go read Ringo's attack on my question about the balance sheet and subsequent ones. Then get back to me on who needs to be civil to whom.

I don't actually know whether Ringo is male or female so it was a "matter of speech."

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 2:29 PM

It says it has access:
"A lovely private landscaped garden accessed from either the parlor or garden levels completes the pretty picture."

BH has always confused me, in terms of WHY it's so damn expensive. OK, sick view. That's pretty much it. It's like a retirement community, but right over a highway (which is really audible when walking near the "waterfront" and literally stresses me out when I'm near there -- just the contrast of the pretty buildings and that subterranean grrrrrrrr). Just feels really claustrophobic. The grander streets of CH and FG beat it hands down for elegance, beauty, sheer glam -- enhanced by the fact that the people who inhabit those neighborhoods are not identical clones of each other, as they seem to be in BH.

Posted by: iz at May 6, 2009 2:31 PM

This building is over 5,950 sq. ft. I got that off of propertyshark (There were no mention of the taxes because of the co-op designation). So the whole thing's worth $5-6MM or perhaps even more. It is a 3 unit building.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 2:31 PM

I can see a scenario where a couple have always lived in Brooklyn Heights, maybe even on this block, now the kids have gone, the housekeeper retired, granma passed away, they want to sell the big house but hate to leave their friends so they say lets sell the place for 5.2 million and buy the "little" place across the street for 2.2 million and use the balance as mad money. Maybe buy that little place we saw in Haute Provence.

the rich have many choices.

Posted by: sam at May 6, 2009 2:31 PM

dave, you are a loser. you spend every day, all day posting on this website trying to get people to like you. i wish you could step back and realize how bad you sound. you really are a grotesque person...anyone who would say otr to someone is not a very nice human being.

Posted by: swine_flu at May 6, 2009 2:33 PM

swine flu...anyone who spends his/her time on this blog as a self-appointed thread monitor is the real loser. You never have anything to add to a discussion...its always the same old lurking and then personal comments.

You spend all day reading other people's posts. Who's the loser??

I don't care if anyone likes me or not, especially you and whatever your other login name is. Pathetic.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 2:37 PM

Take your responses to the OT.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 2:42 PM

I have been posting on-and-off on this blog for a while and of all the regular posters Dave is the last one I would deem a "loser", altho I would never use that word to describe anyone even those who I think it may fit.
Dave is a smart guy and he writes well and he has a house in Broklyn and one in Philly. What do you have?

Posted by: sam at May 6, 2009 2:45 PM

Ringo...I apologize if you are a woman and were offended by the OTR comment. I meant it merely as a matter of speech after you continued to attack me. If you're going to attack someone for asking a question, you ought to be able to take what you dish out. Lesson learned?

However, nowhere in your profile does it say what you are and the only other Ringo i know of is a man. Add some info to your profile or get off the high horse.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 2:48 PM

what an apology.

Posted by: swine_flu at May 6, 2009 2:51 PM

They are some posting who should re-read some of their posts lately before throwing stones.

Posted by: DeLepp at May 6, 2009 2:51 PM

Not meant for you, swine. Take it to the OT if you want to battle me. You'll lose. I guarantee it. I know more words than you do.

Make a comment on the property. Can you???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 2:53 PM

Dave, I don't know whether I "like" you or think you are a "loser" or "gods gift to commenters" but you have made some valid, solid points in the past. So hat tips to you.

Posted by: iz at May 6, 2009 2:55 PM

Thanks iz. I won't usually post like that unless someone else starts first on any other thread except the OT...and rarely there because everyone there usually is civil to each other.

I just found it odd that a sensible question on my part evoked that response and then it continued. We all have our bad days though.

This COTD is not as clear cut as most conos and co-ops for many reasons. Comps are gonna be tough for a place like this but there's probably 50/50 probability that they pay cash

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 3:01 PM

if you have way too much $$$ to know what to do with it, where to store it, etc, yeah, why not drop 2.2M on this. If you aint over-flowing with $$$, other better options than this.

nice place though - just not 2.2M + 1.8k maint nice

Posted by: more4less at May 6, 2009 3:08 PM

I'm still a housing bull, but 2.25 million is WACKO.

Posted by: Adam Dahill at May 6, 2009 3:29 PM

Don't want to get in between DIBS and the others, but I strongly disagree about the price of 5-6 mill. or maybe more for this house, even at this size. I have been looking in this very area, and have seen 3 houses, all about 5,000 sq. feet with good income garden rentals (my preferred set-up) and they were not going for that much, because the market in Brooklyn has definitely taken a hit and it is even more of a bargain compared to Manhattan. There are a couple of 6,500 - 7000 sq. foot house that are actually glorious mansions for that amount, but this sure doesn't look like they do. I think the price is out of line both in terms of the comps and the overall appeal of the place. It does have a nice floor plan, but that the only thing that I think it has going for it over similarly priced possibilities.

Posted by: homey at May 6, 2009 4:31 PM

It's a three-unit coop. Read carefully.

Posted by: punko at May 6, 2009 4:35 PM

"OTR" actually stands for "on the record," as in "about that short sale, FINRA wants to see you for an OTR interview."

Posted by: likes2lurk at May 6, 2009 4:45 PM

I thought it stood for Open Thread Reject.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at May 6, 2009 4:53 PM

homey...I was probably exaggerating a bit on the "$5-6MM or more" price.

If i remmeber correctly you are Leslie N.'s friend, right???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 6, 2009 5:00 PM

prices are quite extraordinary on this street. There is little turnover and high demand. Of course the market has taken a huge hit all around so even Garden Place I'm sure is seeing a downtick. But even so, this is a perfectly lovely, aristocratic, move-in condition apartment, on one of the boro's premier blocks, so it has more going for it than most product out there right now. And the fact that it is not the whole house I think works in its favor as that is rarer still on this block.

Posted by: sam at May 6, 2009 5:19 PM

Half a house is far from aristocratic. It's more like broke English gentry renting out rooms in their estates.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at May 6, 2009 5:46 PM

drugs, they must really be on drugs. you can get a whole house in boerum hill for that price and a whole house in brooklyn heights for that price now days! the halloween parade isn't that fantastic!

Posted by: witchdoctor at May 6, 2009 6:43 PM

I knew the word aristocratic would get to snark.

Posted by: sam at May 6, 2009 7:29 PM

Yes, I am DIBs. And sam, I don't think 3 bedrooms in with low ceilings on the "garden" level qualifies as aristocratic either. I really think that people looking in BH, many of whom are coming from Manhattan, are looking for something a bit grand. I don't think this place fits the bill, except for the price.

Posted by: homey at May 6, 2009 8:12 PM

homey..you're right. No one paying more than $800-900,000 should have to live on the garden level. Living there for $2MM+ is insane.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 7, 2009 8:26 AM

« Brooklyn Food & Drink Round-Up House of the Day: 433 Pacific Street »

May 6, 2009

Co-op of the Day: 11 Garden Place

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions