« Co-op of the Day: 41 Eastern Parkway, #5C Streetlevel: Yummy Taco Opens in South Slope »

June 3, 2009

House of the Day: 240 Dean Street

Unlike many under-the-radar brokers, Precious Properties has done a very nice job with the photos in this listing for 240 Dean Street in Boerum Hill. Nonetheless, we continue to be amazed that sellers opt for the inferior marketing reach of outfits like this. After all, it's our job to keep an eye out for listings like this and it us over a month to come across this one. The two-family Victorian hit the market in mid-April with a price tag of $1,595,000 and was reduced last week to $1,499,000. While a little on the narrow side, we were positively impressed with the condition and aesthetics of the interiors. We'd think this would be attracting interest at this level. Is it a matter of low visibility or are we being overly optimistic about the price?
240 Dean Street [Precious Properties] GMAP P*Shark

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/9948

Comments

I have no idea if they will get their price or not, but I absolutely love this house. What a gem!

Posted by: Montrose Morris at June 3, 2009 1:24 PM

Very nice indeed. I'm not loving the kitchen right in the middle of the parlour floor but haven't thought out a better floorplan yet. That setup kind of informalizes what are otherwise a beautiful formal living room and dining room. I'm nitpicking.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at June 3, 2009 1:26 PM

I pass this house frequently, and have always admired it. Given that, plus the nice interior reno, I'd say it goes for close to new ask.

Posted by: denton at June 3, 2009 1:26 PM

This house looks really sweet. I like the set up and the light!

Posted by: homey at June 3, 2009 1:27 PM

went to this open house last week. the house is cute but the way its cut into two seperate apartments makes it feel like a small co-op rather than a house. the broker was odd to say the least, the open house started with an architecture quiz and we were given a tour instead of just checking it out at our leisure. the massive metal stairwell in the back made the garden feel small but the second floor porch was nice. its a cool house that been a bit too chopped in my humble opinion.

Posted by: twc at June 3, 2009 1:28 PM

"After all, it's our job to keep an eye out for listings like this and it us over a month to come across this one."

Well, then you guys aren't really paying attention. I noticed this listing the day it came out--a few months ago. It was in the NYTIMES, and you click the option for NEW LISTINGS (less than 7 days)!

Posted by: bk14 at June 3, 2009 1:28 PM

what a charming house! Great light.

Posted by: bklynrosie at June 3, 2009 1:29 PM

cute house, what the deal with this style? are there other houses like this around? I would love to see what it looked like originally.

Posted by: Jimmy Legs at June 3, 2009 1:35 PM

Fair enough, bk14. We think they did a nice job with this listing, as we said, but you're definitely starting at a disadvantage using a relatively unknown broker. You better have a pretty good reason for doing it--otherwise, why not just go FSBO. After all, anyone can put a listing in The Times. If you're paying a broker fee, presumably you want maximum marketing power...

Posted by: brownstoner at June 3, 2009 1:36 PM

This house is gorgeous - love how light it is
If my memory is correct when we were looking at houses in 2003, this house was on the market for 999K
Great House - hope it goes close to ask!

Posted by: gemini10 at June 3, 2009 1:36 PM

Wow, this place is a dollhouse but very special. Might work better as a single family, but at least the width isn't an issue because of the central staircase.

Posted by: mopar at June 3, 2009 1:37 PM

is that listing correct that a tenant in the basemt is paying $1.9k for half the basement or was that for the ground flr?

nice house and pricey. I see this clearing around 1.2M's

Posted by: more4less at June 3, 2009 1:39 PM

Maybe they'll take 10 percent off ask, and this will be $1.2 million. That would probably be pretty reasonable for the area, no?

Posted by: mopar at June 3, 2009 1:41 PM

You're right brownie--good point.

Posted by: bk14 at June 3, 2009 1:42 PM

What a delight. Though it's better as a one family.

Posted by: DeLepp at June 3, 2009 1:52 PM

Oh wow, I haven't had much to say about the HOTD lately because they've all left me flat. This one, just lovely. What a great house.

Posted by: TownhouseLady at June 3, 2009 1:53 PM

Bob Marvin...when do you think this place was actually built?? 1860s-1870s???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at June 3, 2009 1:55 PM

I'm surprised that no one's mentioned the fact that this house has a "twin" next door. check out the Google street view.

Posted by: johnife at June 3, 2009 2:07 PM

Agree - very pretty house and good location - $1.2-$1.3mm. Asking price is similar to the S.Oxford house yesterday, but comparison is night & day.

Posted by: etson at June 3, 2009 2:11 PM

johnife...i bet the same guy restored and owns both houses. Seems that the other one may own the "lot" in between as this listing says "On Street Parking"

I wonder why no windows were put in on the side of this house???? (From the Streetview)

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at June 3, 2009 2:17 PM

It's lovely and think it will get close to what we're averaging here on brownstoner. Only quibble is the tile in the bath isn't consonant with the fixtures, but big whoop.

Re: big vs smaller brokers - I'm sure sellers have a reason for going with them. Go underdog brokers! Why is a mom and pop store good, but mom and pop broker frowned on? At least they seem to be a local outfit, unlike that big lummox, Corcoran.

Posted by: bridges at June 3, 2009 2:18 PM

Doesn't this lot also have the empty space next door? Maybe that belongs to the twin house.

This is a fascinating comparison with the South Oxford house yesterday -- narrow houses that are nicely done, yet the consensus seems much stronger for this house than the South Oxford (even if the other one is arguably in a better school zone). Anyone want to guess why? Is it just the rental income?

Posted by: Boerumresident at June 3, 2009 2:19 PM

I've seen this house. It's really special, but it would be much, much better as a 1 family. There is something odd about the separation into 2 units. It needs a feng-shui reorganization. It's too bad, because otherwise it has wonderful charm and details.

Posted by: Maly at June 3, 2009 2:20 PM

This would also be my preferred location if I were to move from Bed Stuy...close to all the restaurants on Atlantic/Smith/Court and the A train at Hoyt/Schermerhorn. Ideal.

The neighborhood is about $700k more than a comparable nice house in Bed Stuy.....that's a lot of car rides at $13 each, 53,846 to be exact!!!!

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at June 3, 2009 2:23 PM

I don't think you get a renovated (and nicely done) house around this area for any $1.2-$1.3 price range.
I think if used a real broker - would get current asking.
Subtract 75k for not using one.

Posted by: Petebklyn at June 3, 2009 2:24 PM

Even though ad gives 1910 DOB age, first photo caption says "House is listed in AIA guide to NYC as an architectural classic of 1858 Victorian cottage style."

Looks like a variation on Carpenter Gothic to me. Sure is special.

Posted by: mopar at June 3, 2009 2:26 PM

I agree, mopar...I was guessing 1860s-1870s. It's very similar in style to a house I had in Chicago which was built in 1875, right after the 1871 fire.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at June 3, 2009 2:29 PM

This listing is beautifully done and highlights the unique selling point of this house, which is its architectural distinction. It sounds like the broker loves old houses and knows a lot about them, especially if she's offering pop quizzes on architectural history.

As long as the broker puts the listing on the MLS, the NYT, and Craigslist, you get the same exposure regardless of who you list with. Only Corcoran gets more exposure, with its highly trafficked Web site. If you list with a broker with a neighborhood specialty, such as Kevin Carberry, you will get buyers who are looking in a specific area.

The only brokers to avoid are ones like Fillmore, which can't put up a good listing or easily pass on messages. (Fillmore has some great brokers, but the listing format is so bad it discourages buyers.)

Posted by: mopar at June 3, 2009 2:37 PM

Boerumresident,
Think the fact that this one is wider is part of it. Even if it is only a 2.5ft difference, it's a big 2.5ft. Also this one seems to have much better light (admittedly based on photos rather than experience).

Posted by: etson at June 3, 2009 2:42 PM

went to the first open house - its fine but way overpriced - the stairs are narrow and steep as you sometimes see in older homes - would be much better as a single family

Posted by: jnjnjn2 at June 3, 2009 2:45 PM

Fantastic restoration with excellent light but price needs to come down another $100k for it to move....South Oxford house from yesterday is a superior place and better location in our opinion hence price differential

BTW does anyone know who did the renovation work?

Posted by: pierre de taille at June 3, 2009 3:07 PM

I LOVE, love, love their style! It's so clean and open, yet tastefully decorated. I love the flow between the kitchen and the living room. It's full of sunlight and that's rare for a house in the city.

Posted by: cmar7785 at June 3, 2009 3:08 PM

I think that 1854 is a much more accurate date for this house than 1910. It is a nice romantic style frame house, very nicely and accurately restored on the exterior. There must have been three matching houses in a row. The middle one was torn down, probably for parking. Probably back in the day when the price of one of these houses was about the same as a used car. Someone should buy that middle lot and rebuild the missing house.
This house is absolutely charming. Especially as a one-family. It is not too narrow at all and the location is prime Boerum Hill, in the historic district (which probably explains the excellent restoration).

Posted by: sam at June 3, 2009 3:20 PM

Why would a broker ever list on their own site how long a property has been on the market?

Posted by: NorthHeights at June 3, 2009 4:27 PM

Very sweet house. I think the layout on the upper floors is great! Am I missing something or does the tenant have to go down into the cellar for their bathroom?

Posted by: bessie2 at June 3, 2009 5:03 PM

I love the look of this house, too. Nicely done, sellers, and good luck getting your price!

One downside to mom-n-pop Brooklyn brokers that hasn't been mentioned is their typical practice of refusing to co-broker a deal-- that is, to split the commish with a buyer broker. I know it's less of a tradition in NYC to use a buyer broker, but it's common in most American cities—and if you get a good one, it can take an enormous amount of labor out of the hunt. The real-estate boards of most cities (including NYC) require members to agree to co-broke, which is which so many of these little Brooklyn shops don't join REBNY. I think they should.

I don't know, however, about this particular broker's practices. They do take nice photos!

Posted by: Rehab at June 3, 2009 5:08 PM

Price seems right. Beautiful.

Posted by: KHuebbe at June 3, 2009 5:59 PM

At some point do we get to talk about the idea that people choose brokers for all kinds of different reasons, like that they relate to the broker or trust the broker or have had good luck with them in the past?

As a buyer (or maybe not a buyer, since I still haven't bloody bought) I actually have found smaller brokers more willing to talk to me and ask questions and show me places that are consistent with what I'm looking for.

Go Mom & Pop brokers!

Posted by: serpentor at June 3, 2009 6:00 PM

it may have taken a month but it's in a pretty good shop window now!

Posted by: the chicken at June 3, 2009 6:02 PM

I suspect any serious brownstone bklyn buyer is going to go thru the NYT site first, then to the listing sites. So I don't see this as an exposure issue.

The real problem is the Precious Properties Web listing. They give way too much information! I'm serious. I think you want to whet buyers' appetite to learn more about a place, not give them reasons to reject it. To me, 5 well-chosen photos are all you need, plus an accurate floorplan and tax data, and you're good to go. Anything else is TMI.

Posted by: Bolder at June 3, 2009 6:05 PM

Nice example of what professional photos do. No doubt the house, bases on the exposures layout and windows, has great light -- however, the these pictures were augmented by professional lighting. Not that that's cheating. In fact, I think it probably gives a more accurate feel for what it's really like. Just saying -- it pays to have photos done right.

Looks lovely. Though the three people who've seen it so far are all saying the same thing about the division.

Posted by: Nomi at June 3, 2009 7:32 PM

I went to an open house here two months back. It's lovely and charming and unique, but I can tell from walking through with an architect- there are A LOT of structural issues. It's an old wood-frame and the stairs and many of the floors are tilted/unlevel. The ceilings on the top floor are not level either, which probably means there are issues around the roof. My architect through you'd have to correct a lot of things, which is going to be costly... My take is the current owners knew this but redid the kitchen and bath to try to gloss over the issues. It's way too expensive for the area (proximity to projects) and the amount of work to be done. And yes, there is an empty lot next door and it does belong to the 'twin' house. Apparently it will never be developed because the twin house uses it as their year, but an empty lot is still and empty lot to me....

Posted by: SOCO at June 3, 2009 7:47 PM

This is a nice house. The bathroom situation isn't ideal, though. Those renters have to go down into the basement to take a leak? But the house is smallish and narrow, so I guess they've done what they could to preserve space.

Their website could be clearer. I couldn't find the floorplan for a few minutes. Although after I saw it, I was less enthusiastic.

Posted by: RinTinTin at June 3, 2009 8:15 PM

The photos are lovely but the floor plan is odd to say the least - one bathroom for the owner's unit? And no bathrooms on main living floors? And do owner and tenant share the entrance? Regardless of pretty style, I think the layout problems call for a price reduction (as, needless to say, does the current climate).

Posted by: Miss Muffett at June 3, 2009 9:08 PM

I agree with RinTinTin and Miss Muffett, the bathroom situation is just weird. I get trying to maximize living space, and its on the narrow side (but not like that S. Oxford street house, its really night and day), but I think no WC on the parlor level in the owners duplex, plus the garden rental having its bathroom in the basement are real drawbacks to this property. Despite a beautiful renovation, I would have work crews inside putting a half bath somewhere on the parlor floor, though for the life of me I can't figure out a place for it yet.

Aside from this glaring problem, I can see people paying the price listed for this house, it is beautiful outside and in. I wish I could see pictures of the garden and the back deck, as both can increase the value, the back deck is a luxury addition for many in Park Slope, and the fact that its built over the garden rental bedroom is nice, so that the deck doesn't block light from entering the bedroom down there. I'm stymied how the website suggests that the garden rental is getting $1,900 in rent, but I digress, its in a decent area near trains, thats a lot for many renters and even homeowners. Plus Atlantic is getting better all the time, and there are some nifty shops that dot that neighborhood east of Smith Street.

Posted by: thetycoon at June 4, 2009 11:40 AM

Posted by: brownstoner at June 3, 2009 1:36 PM

Fair enough!? You never stop rooting for those who pay your bills, which is to say large brokers in the area. When does Brownstoner finally realize that those times have long passed? The market has changed. Corcoran is going under, and many other conglomerate brokerage firms are not doing well. Having endless sales listed doesn't mean a large broker will in fact SELL any of them. Marketing power? Marketing power rests with those who work hard, don't complain, and help their customers (be it sellers or landlords) ACHIEVE THEIR GOALS, a sale, a rental.

Haven't you been one of many to continually report on large firm's failures to SELL innumerable condos? Haven't you reported on many a developer's project GOING BANKRUPT because your beloved large firms couldn't perform?

Interesting that you would keep on rooting for the big guys - let's face it. Their time has passed.

Posted by: Ijosephaaronow at July 5, 2009 11:19 PM

Soco or anyone: where are the projects located?

Thanks in advance for your reply.

Posted by: Lizzy at July 27, 2009 11:18 PM

« Co-op of the Day: 41 Eastern Parkway, #5C Streetlevel: Yummy Taco Opens in South Slope »

June 3, 2009

House of the Day: 240 Dean Street

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions