« Slope Armory on Track to Open in September House of the Day: 357 Pacific Street »
June 29, 2009
Co-op of the Day: 111 Hicks Street, #18F

The alcove studio on the 18th floor of 111 Hicks Street was recently renovated and listed with an asking price of $419,000. The views are to die for and the apartment looks to be in good shape; we're not wild about the aesthetics of the kitchen or bathroom though. Are you?
111 Hicks Street, #18F [Halstead] GMAP P*Shark
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/10399
Comments
CCs are ridiculous, especially for someone buying in this price range.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at June 29, 2009 12:46 PM
Obscenely priced, if you ask me. 420K and $875K maintenance for a STUDIO? In Brooklyn?!
Hells to the no.
P.s. I looked at a few studios in this building when I was looking to buy 2 years ago and 1. They were under 300K and B. My agent did a little research after the fact and said to stay the hell away from this building because the finances are a disaster. I didn't care for the apartments...they feel cheap.
Posted by: 11217 at June 29, 2009 12:47 PM
I have a question for an accountant. I believe the IRS allows you to deduct mortgage interest from ONLY two properties at most. I know there's a dollar cap as well. If one owns a co-op and deducts both building morttgage interest and unit mortgage interest does that preclude them from deducting interest on a second home as well???
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at June 29, 2009 12:51 PM
If you were looking to buy and had a 420K budget, which place would you choose...??
http://www.corcoran.com/property/listing.aspx?Region=NYC&ListingID=1571298
Posted by: 11217 at June 29, 2009 12:53 PM
i dont get why anyone would blow this monthly nut on a place this size. is view really everything.
oh, and im offended by the use of the word "hicks". please remove.
Posted by: goldie at June 29, 2009 12:55 PM
Good comparison, 11217...I'd take your post but the monthly charges are totally ridiculous for both. As you said earlier, there could be wild disparities in the finances of both buildings.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at June 29, 2009 12:57 PM
I agree, Dave. Nutso.
And as much of a Brooklyn lover as I am, if these were my two options, I'd take the place in the West Village.
It's supposed to be that if maintenance charges are high, you price the apartment accordingly (i.e. LOWER).
As I said, the studios I looked at in this building in 2006 were 289K, 279K. Not sure exactly how any of them could be asking 420K these days. This one is sure to sit and rot.
Posted by: 11217 at June 29, 2009 1:00 PM
The aesthetics of the kitchen and bath is your only problem?!
jesus.
Posted by: tybur6 at June 29, 2009 1:10 PM
"Not sure exactly how any of them could be asking 420K these days."
Because the owners are doing 420.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at June 29, 2009 1:10 PM
Umm... also, it's a studio, right? That is to say, one big(-ish) room. Where does Halstead get this "2.5 rooms" figure? The closet in the entry way counts?
Posted by: tybur6 at June 29, 2009 1:17 PM
"If one owns a co-op and deducts both building morttgage interest and unit mortgage interest does that preclude them from deducting interest on a second home as well???"
DIBS, you should double-check with an acct but I lived in a coop for a number of years, also had a second place. I never had an issue deducting all three mortgages, and had a coupla different accountants over that time.
My thinking would be it's the number of _properties_ involved, not the number of mortgages. For example, you could deduct main mortgage on a single family, heloc, and second home interest as well.
In fact for a time I had a small heloc on my coop as well, so I was deducting underlying mortgage, my mortgage, my heloc, and second home. Never a problem, in fact could probably get a heloc on second home and deduct that as well.
Posted by: denton at June 29, 2009 1:17 PM
My experience is similar to 11217 - I was told not to even look in this building because the finances are bad, and the board is very difficult.
Posted by: CarrollGardened at June 29, 2009 1:20 PM
Room 1 - Living Room
Room 2 - kitchen
Room 1/2 - Sleeping alcove
Posted by: 11217 at June 29, 2009 1:21 PM
denton, there was a point where I deducted three mortgages and a heloc. Just did it. There was a law though that you were restricted to two residences. That law may have changed when they put the cap on for the amount you could deduct (which is huge).
When i started using an accountant in 2007, I just gave him the overall amount of mortgage interest. I had paid off one of the mortgages and the Heloc that year but there was still interest for them. I didn't ask him that question because I didn't want to raise a red flag.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at June 29, 2009 1:37 PM
This is something I don't get. Personally, if this were my place, I would have turned it into a one bedroom. The bedroom would effectively have two windows and be a large room, and would leave the living room a sufficient size as well. To all you posters, I pose this question: what is the benefit of keeping an alcove studio with a window a studio? Wouldn't anybody rather having the privacy of their own bedroom. I don't think I'll ever understand :)
Posted by: cmar7785 at June 29, 2009 1:42 PM
> what is the benefit of keeping an alcove studio with a window a studio?
Open space. A place this small with too many walls would feel claustrophobic to me. Besides, if you live alone - and in my opinion this place is only big enough for one person - how does having a separate bedroom give you more privacy?
Posted by: DitmasSnark at June 29, 2009 2:22 PM
Good answer DS.
I would agree. I would not put up a wall in a place like this either. That bedroom would feel like a deathtrap.
Posted by: 11217 at June 29, 2009 2:25 PM
Well, on is not always alone in a studio. There are times you might want privacy. But the positive of a larger studio is the openness of the space. Some, like this one, are certainly conceivable with a separated bedroom, unlike many studios which are simply too small. It's a very individual thing, I think, what one's preferences and priorities are. Personally it'd be hard for me to give up either the privacy or space.
Posted by: Nomi at June 29, 2009 2:36 PM
wow, I was about to go off on how you could rent a 2BR for this monthly, but that view is a panty-dropper.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at June 29, 2009 3:04 PM
When everyone criticizes buildings for their maintenance costs will you please at least try to understand how much of it is related to real estate taxes that coops pay at MUCH higher rates than all of you with your brownstones? This little studio likely pays $3-4K a year in real estate taxes as part of its maintenance.
Posted by: BH76 at June 29, 2009 3:33 PM
My bf pays less in maintenance than this for a 2BR in a full service building. This maintenance is too damn high for a studio apartment. Period.
Posted by: DitmasSnark at June 29, 2009 4:42 PM
BH76:
It doesn't matter if it's going towards actual maintenance or taxes, it's the monthly amount that's absolutely insane.
And it only goes up!
My mortgage payment for my studio isn't much more than the maintenance of this place. Ridonkulous.
Posted by: 11217 at June 29, 2009 4:44 PM
1. Taxes are higher in Brooklyn Heights than most (if not all) other parts of Brooklyn.
2. Taxes on NYC co-ops are higher than on NYC houses.
3. Ergo, co-ops in Brooklyn Heights pay a lot of taxes.
4. High taxes = high maintenance charges.
You might very well think the maintenance charges for Heights co-ops are too high, but it's usually related to taxes, not to snobby co-op boards who think they can get away with charging an arm and a leg (or two), as seems to be the general tone of comments here whenever the topic comes up.
According to the building's website, about 1/3 of the maintenance goes to taxes. If the monthly maintenance is $875, that translates to $3500/year - as BH76 points out, this studio pays more in taxes than most of the Brownstone Belt houses featured here.
http://tinyurl.com/lgeqtc
Posted by: NorthHeights at June 29, 2009 5:08 PM
Whoa, as a regular Brownstoner reader, I was not surprised to see a bunch of posts from readers who seem to have nothing better to do than idly speculate about a place they have never set foot in and haven't even so much as done 30 seconds research about the building or the neighborhood on Street Easy. But I will admit that it did bother me that these posts were about the building that I call home, so I thought I would post a little information to set the record straight.
As I do live in the building and have also been on the Board in the past, I will be the first to tell you that this apartment is way overpriced. But instead of making unfounded accusations against people you have never even met, I think one has to acknowledge that Halstead (as well as the owner) has to take some responsibility for this figure. I know from looking at other listings in the nabe, that Halstead as well as other realtors tends to overprice a lot of their properties just to see what will stick.
17C, just below it, which is the same layout and an even better renovation, just sold for $360,000, which I thought was too high but clearly someone wanted it, probably for the views which are pretty fabulous.
Yes, the maintenance in the building is high, but the finances themselves are in excellent shape, due to the diligence and acumen of the current board. In the past, when the real estate market has not been overheated, the prices in the building have been lower than in comparable buildings in the neighborhood as they they have reflected the high maintenenance. (Those studios near 300K could have been bought for $25,000 in the early and mid 1990s:) It's only in the tail end of the irrational exuberance of the NYC real estate market that prices in our building have become often unrealistic.
FYI, the maintenance is high for several reasons that are way more complicated than I could detail here, but to give you an idea:
-taxes are high in the neighborhood and for the building, as has been pointed out here previously
-it's an old building that requires a lot of upkeep
-the original developer that did the conversion took out a lot of money from the plan and saddled the building with a very high underlying mortgage which is being paid down but still substantial 25 years later.
-also the conversion was not done to last and there had been a lot of deferred maintenance, until the last seven or eight years when the predecessors of the current board started addressing these problems which unfortunately also increased costs
-it's a totally full service building--24 hour doorman, live in super, on site manager and porters and cleaning staff on from 7 AM to midnight seven days a week
-as an extra large building, we get saddled with increased costs, such as added insurance (which went way up after 9/11), and extra RE taxes on top of the high rate.
All that said, the building is home to almost 300 units, all of them occupied by friendly people of all walks of life. The building has a longstanding reputation of being friendly and open to people of all sorts of backgrounds and preferences, unlike many other buildings in the neighborhood, and that's why many shareholders in the coop have chosen to live in the building.
Posted by: 111hicks at June 30, 2009 1:25 AM
Thanks for the inside scoop.
Posted by: DitmasSnark at June 30, 2009 7:56 AM

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