« Crack is Wack for Slope Building More Trouble for CoHousing Group »

July 29, 2009

Taking the Pulse of 4th Avenue's Inventory

4th%20ave%20devo%20roundup%202.jpg
Sure, sometimes it seems like there are countless new condos on 4th Avenue, but, in fact, between the expressway and Atlantic Avenue there are only five that currently have units for sale. Some of the recent-vintage builds ended up being rentals, and it's unclear whether the next few that seem likely to actually finish construction, such as 574 4th Avenue, will be rentals or condos. Herewith, the latest numbers available on Brooklyn's Park Avenue condo inventory:

500 Fourth Avenue: Its marketers claimed last month that 20 percent of the 156 units are in contract. So: Around 125 available.
The Argyle: 8 out of 60 units remain, per Corcoran's listings page.
The Novo: 1 unit left for sale, according to StreetEasy.
The Crest: 2 units left unspoken for, says StreetEasy.
The Elan: Broker said last month 7 units were in contract; since then, 18 of the 32 units have been listed as rentals. Thus: 25 available depending on how you look at it. (While this one's about 20 yards from 4th Avenue proper, we're considering it 4th Avenue in spirit.)

Final analysis: Give or take, there are about 160 new condos to sell on 4th Avenue right now. A decent amount, yes, and there are more coming eventually. But it's not a Williamsburg-esque condopocalypse situation. And, at the end of the day, there's really only one building, 500 Fourth, accounting for the overwhelming majority of inventory.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/10768

Comments

I would guess those numbers are vastly understated. Corcoran lists 8 available at The Argyle, but I would be absolutely amazed if the other 52 are actually in contract and have any likelihood of closing. And while the Crest and Novo have been around awhile, I still think they are holding back inventory, at least the Novo. And not sure buildings moving to rental improves the situation?

Posted by: dcorreale at July 29, 2009 11:11 AM

If we are counting condos for sale, how exactly do buildings moving to rental not improve the situation?

No matter what you think about these buildings, rentals will be occupied.

Posted by: 11217 at July 29, 2009 11:14 AM

Well 1) they make it less desirable to buy in a building with rentals 2) make it more likely that a potential buyer of this area will rent first, especially in this environment and 3) just prove the area is not selling and bring the general hype down

Posted by: dcorreale at July 29, 2009 11:18 AM

Actually the Novo and Crest may be the only two not holding back inventory from open houses I've attended and according to ACRIS.

Posted by: kimerama at July 29, 2009 11:20 AM

I don't really agree, dcorreale. New York is a city of renters. You do realize that only about 32% of New Yorkers own property, right?

The rest rent.

Posted by: 11217 at July 29, 2009 11:21 AM

The rentals will sit on the market for months as well - since I'm sure the developer will think 3K for a 1 bedroom on 4th Avenue is fair.

Posted by: dirty_hipster at July 29, 2009 11:24 AM

It is a city of rentals, but mixed buildings are undesirable for buyers...and developers admitting they can't sell and are forced to go to rental when it wasn't their first choice does not help the area. Granted, it is a bit of a chicken and egg that feeds off of each other, but either way, the area is clearly less desirable than the developers assumed

Posted by: dcorreale at July 29, 2009 11:29 AM

"it's not a Williamsburg-esque condopocalypse situation"

Not yet. What percentage of alleged "sales" have actually closed? Never seem to be able to get this question answered.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at July 29, 2009 11:34 AM

Future Low-Income housing..

The What (Pass me a 40)

Someday this war is gonna end..

Posted by: Return of The What at July 29, 2009 11:34 AM

Wait...
What about the building on 19th street and 4th avenue
and the new bldg that is going up on 17th and 4th avenue
and I think there's another one down on 4th avenue at 22nd street. Oh, and the other one that is on Warren and 4th and what about Baltic and 4th? Wait, one more - the bldg that I think we all joke about at 1st and 4th
seems to be many more 4th avenue bldgs than the above mentioned......

Posted by: gemini10 at July 29, 2009 11:36 AM

gemini10 you're right there's more in addition to stalled projects with empty lots.

Posted by: kimerama at July 29, 2009 11:47 AM

Though this is only about the bldgs betw the expressway & 4th Ave...

Posted by: max_r_and_r at July 29, 2009 11:50 AM

Make that, the expressway & atlantic.

Posted by: max_r_and_r at July 29, 2009 11:51 AM

"and it's unclear whether the next few that seem likely to actually finish construction,"

R.I.F.

Posted by: crimsonson at July 29, 2009 11:52 AM

Max R:
ah right - but still the bld on 4th and 17th is before the Expressway and the Baltic,Warren and the other one on first all fall in the area of discussion. I just think that the high rise buidlings they erected on those streets had decided to go rental before the others!

Posted by: gemini10 at July 29, 2009 11:56 AM

True, it would be interesting to know how the new rental are doing.

Posted by: max_r_and_r at July 29, 2009 11:58 AM

How many rentals can the market take? The rental deals are going to only get better

Posted by: brickoven at July 29, 2009 12:09 PM

Yeah, I can wait until Oct. 1 to move, but for various reasons would rather move Sept. 1 or Sept. 15.

But I'm wondering if I'm just better off waiting as it seems the rental market is just hitting some stress right now and better deals could be had in Sept. than Aug.

Posted by: northsloperenter at July 29, 2009 12:35 PM

northslope there is going to be alot of competition for renters in Oct.

Posted by: brickoven at July 29, 2009 12:50 PM

My old landlord told me that Sept 1 was his usual start date on a lease. He catered to students and sometimes apartments would sit vacant for months in the "off" months. And recently on Brownstoner, there was an article stating that summer is the prime rental season. So maybe you will be better off waiting till fall, northsloperenter.

Posted by: Kris at July 29, 2009 1:43 PM

The brokers continue to engage in the fictitious "in contract" game. The advice given here is that all parties ACTUALLY in contract should permit the brokers to reveal these so called signed contracts (with some form of confidentiality to the parties) to prospective buyers. It would help the parties already "in contract" attract additional buyers for the building and thus a quicker CofO and the formation of a board; and it also would also legitimize the developer and move the inventory with confidence. It is certainly not surprising that that the brokers are not engaging this method of proof to move innentory: THE PROOF SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST (EMPHASIS ADDED. The idea that this "in contract" game is played by brokers, and permitted by office managers without having to legally prove the same to prospective buyers who actually enter into contract under such false information is very smelly.

Posted by: foulplay at July 29, 2009 2:42 PM

I would be very interested in a similar analysis for the Prospect Heights area, particularly with all the new condo bldgs that seem to be sprouting around Washington Ave. I'd be surprised if anyone is buying in those things.

Posted by: clintonhillbuyer at July 29, 2009 3:58 PM

The Schadenfreude here is sad - and apparently misplaced. Despite the worst predictions by these here - based on their dislike of the architechture, these units have mostly sold. Proving 1. the desirability of Park Slope (which is btw a good reason to leave out those developments further down 4th - since it is a different market), the desire of people to spend less per sq ft (these building were all cheaper than the prevailing PS condo prices) and finally shows the total irrelevancy of exterior architechture to sales (which makes sense because the people living in a building see it less than almost anyone else)

But you all keep ignoring the evidence to the contrary and stick with your initial premises - you sound so smart doing that

Posted by: fsrg at July 29, 2009 4:01 PM

I have not tracked 500 4th Ave, but AFAIK Argyle closing is doing well. I also doubt every single one of the 33 units under contract (I think about 15 have already closed and 1 is for the super) will close. But I think those will be the exceptions.

But I agree with FSRQ, I think people are underestimating 4th Ave as a viable residential area. Being close to 5th (prime Slope) and transportation (Union and 9th Street) has made it a good alternative to prime Slope and Boerum Hill area.

But I also agree that would be developments that now sit as empty lots have controlled supply somewhat - keeping it in par with demand.

Posted by: crimsonson at July 29, 2009 4:26 PM

Many 4th Ave units have excellent, unobstructed north / west views. This is something that appealed to me along with access to mass transit and proximity to 5th Ave (restaurants, shops). On the negative side is the distance (& incline) to Prospect Park, and the "expressway" nature of 4th Ave traffic. Another, albeit ? temporary drawback, is the industrial / commercial character of the avenue. The biggest problem, however, is the high sq ft inflexible pricing of the developers.

Posted by: sjtmd at July 29, 2009 5:34 PM

"But you all keep ignoring the evidence..."

What evidence? What percentage of all alleged "sales" have actually closed? 100%? I asked this at 11:34 am and got nada. How can one verify the number, IF KNOWN?

Maybe it IS 100%. Let's score one for Team Bull and move on. But prove it!

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at July 29, 2009 5:59 PM

Half Off you state what is reasonable. Prove it to the prospective buyers and to the rest of the side line. If the statistics are factual, it would stir true confidence in a very cautious real estate environment. Since these stats are NOT proven, one can only pause, question and doubt. Is not strategy and marketing business the job of the broker?

Posted by: foulplay at July 29, 2009 6:43 PM

You do know that closed real estate deals are public information right? Sheezaz - the level of.... is astounding.

Posted by: crimsonson at July 30, 2009 11:13 AM

"You do know that closed real estate deals are public information right?"

Yeah, that's why I question the percent closure of the stated or implied sales above. I looked here (rolling sales on ACRIS)...

http://tinyurl.com/2jacwn

...and wasn't able to verify. You wanna help? (Why does brownstoner link to corcoran and streeteasy rather than ACRIS?)

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at July 30, 2009 12:19 PM

so I took a gander at ACRIS - looking at sales over the last 12 months one would be hard pressed to find anything at or below the $600/sq ft threshold. Apartments at the Crest, Novo, Argyle, and just up the street at the Heritage have sold at numbers that would substantiate today's asking prices. You can "bid half off peak comps", but it seems that you won't buy at that price....unless, of course, you are in Miami

Posted by: sjtmd at July 30, 2009 9:29 PM

"looking at sales over the last 12 months"

But what percent of total units built in '500', The Argyle, The NOVO, The Cress and The Elan, have actually closed?

I'm talking unsold inventory whether rented out or still in contract. No one seems to have a handle on the % closed number. Smoke and mirrors.

I'm done.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at July 31, 2009 4:56 PM