« Co-op of the Day: 96 South Portland Avenue, #8 Streetlevel: 95 Halsey TBD »

September 9, 2009

House of the Day: 40 Joralemon Street

40-Joralemon-Street-0909.jpg
After being listed with Corcoran for a few months last year at $2,790,000, 40 Joralemon relaunched with Brown Harris Stevens last week at the significantly lower asking price of $2,300,000. The location's obviously great but the house is just nice as opposed to some of the knock-your-socks-off listings that come up in Brooklyn Heights. And since the house is only 2,380 square feet, that asking price comes in at just under $1,000 per foot. Based on the photos, our favorite part of the house is that bedroom with the beautiful wide-plank floors and Greek Revival period mantelpiece.
40 Joralemon Street [Brown Harris Stevens] GMAP P*Shark





Posted by Brownstoner at 1:12 PM | Comments (43)
Categories: Brooklyn Heights, HOTD

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/11332

Comments

Man I love those floorboards as well. Would kill (nearly) for old wide plank floors like that.

Posted by: wasder at September 9, 2009 1:21 PM

Nice house, even if a little bit close to the BQE. I think it will go for close to the new asking price.

Posted by: Simon_Bar_Sinister at September 9, 2009 1:29 PM

well, if we read in papers that owners of this house end up dead , wasder is prime suspect.

I think great looking house with perfect layout (if can do single family). Only thing I don't like is that island bar with stools (which I think are really useless/uncomfortable except for somebody who drinks at saloons regularly)...kinda clashes with the esthetic of the home.

Posted by: Petebklyn at September 9, 2009 1:30 PM

That is nice... Too bad the dining area is only 7 feet wide (notice how they don't have chairs on one side of the dining room table).

Still, it looks lovely.

Joralemon is definitely my favorite brooklyn street name, and, of course, when I first saw it I pronounced it as Jor-A-Lemon (as in "you're a lemon").

Posted by: northsloperenter at September 9, 2009 1:31 PM

wee but cute. i likes.

Posted by: CG_ups at September 9, 2009 1:33 PM

I love it! So cute, I bet if they had priced it at $2.4 when they listed, it would be gone already.

Posted by: Maly at September 9, 2009 1:47 PM

are the plank floors the sub-flooring? had this in a pre-war apartment once and the downstairs neighbor complained of noise from me constantly even though i had big rugs down.

Posted by: wine lover at September 9, 2009 1:58 PM

It is a lovely house in a beautiful location but it seems too small to command such a hefty price. Two million three hundred thousand bucks can buy a lot of space these days. This is almost a dollhouse. It really should not be priced at more than 1.8 million and would be worth that much only because of the location.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 9, 2009 1:58 PM

even for BK Heights, doesn't 2.3M for this small cute house sound pricey? A few really nice houses come to mind in P Slope and Carroll Garden that are priced there or slightly cheaper but bigger & nicer house.

could the BK Heights knowledgeable crowd weight in on how this compares to the other sub-$3M houses in the hood?

Posted by: more4less at September 9, 2009 2:02 PM

$1,000 a square foot for a full house is ridiculous for anything but mansion-quality property. And even then...

Posted by: MoneyForNothing at September 9, 2009 2:09 PM

It's high. The house is very cute but small. A dollhouse.
It is maybe fourteen feet wide at most.


In these pre-brownstone era houses there is no subfloor. the planks are it. Sometimes late 19th century floors were added on top of the planks, but originally the planks were exposed or were meant to be covered with carpeting or rag rugs.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 9, 2009 2:11 PM

ooooh if i win the lotto and this goes under $2MM i'm on it!

Posted by: CG_ups at September 9, 2009 2:26 PM

CG, at this rate, if you win the lotto, you'll own half of Brooklyn Heights! ; )

Posted by: bitter retort at September 9, 2009 2:29 PM

Minard, the floor plan show that the back yard is 18' by 24' deep. Are you saying they are misrepresenting the width of this house?

Posted by: Maly at September 9, 2009 2:30 PM

maly - i think inside dimensions will be smaller than outside dimensions, wall thickness, that type of thing.

Posted by: CG_ups at September 9, 2009 2:31 PM

bitter :) if i win the megamillions, i am going to buy that great house on henry and degraw. i love that house. next to the church that they're turning into condos. so weird that they do that, but whatever.

Posted by: CG_ups at September 9, 2009 2:34 PM

this house sold for about 800k in 2004.

Posted by: FixtheCanal at September 9, 2009 2:34 PM

Love that fireplace! JEALOUS!

Posted by: DarciG at September 9, 2009 2:47 PM

according to property shark the lot is 16 X 66.
that makes the interior of the house 15 feet max (assuming the side bearing walls are only 6 inches thick each). Could they be fudging the dims? Possibly.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 9, 2009 2:49 PM

Yes, it's a more modest sized house. But a dollhouse? Unfair. The interior widths are all over 15-1/2' wide, not 14.

Posted by: Nomi at September 9, 2009 2:52 PM

The houses on willow went for 1.2-1.8 in unrenovated condition, but were much bigger.

This is on top of the subway (vibration!), on a steep cobblestoned street 10 minutes away from the aforementioned subway, nowhere near food or restaurants, and next to a noisy highway overpass.

It is small, poorly laid out, and 2x the price per foot of 1BBP.

1MM for the house and some huge amt for the 'history'

Posted by: thwackamole1 at September 9, 2009 2:56 PM

Once you factor in the width of the walls, which are bearing walls, the lath and plaster, I can't imagine how the interior dimension could be 15 feet. Probably more like 14 feet nine inches. Not a dollhouse, true. But 2.3 million? Gulp!

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 9, 2009 2:57 PM

Does anyone know what 31 Joralemon (basically across the street and down the hill two or three houses) went for? It was listed at $1.5 but seemed like it need some work.

Posted by: Boerumresident at September 9, 2009 3:05 PM

thwackamole, your comments are ignorant. The location of this house is its strength. To say that any location in Brooklyn Heights is inconvenient to shopping or mass transit is just nonsense. The cobblestones are a plus in my book.
Check your anti-Brooklyn Heights bias at the door please.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 9, 2009 3:07 PM

Yes, I agree that it's probably overpriced. But property shark could be incorrect also. Seems foolish to fudge the dimensions that much on a floor plan when a prospective buyer is so likely to check.

Posted by: Nomi at September 9, 2009 3:07 PM

"The location of this house is its strength. To say that any location in Brooklyn Heights is inconvenient to shopping or mass transit is just nonsense. The cobblestones are a plus in my book."

Agree. Also, it's a full block from the highway. Not ideal, but not on top of it either.

Many people moving to Brooklyn Heights want to be on quiet residential streets that are a few minutes walk from shopping and restaurants. But this seems to be an old and tired argument on here ..

Posted by: Nomi at September 9, 2009 3:13 PM

According to the tax map, the lot frontage is 16' 9".

Also, the depth is 66'+ on the downhill side and 68' on the uphill side.

Posted by: Boerumresident at September 9, 2009 3:14 PM

It looks like the listing adds an extra foot all around. That's disappointing. I don't think it looks like a dollhouse, but it's definitely on the narrower side.

Posted by: Maly at September 9, 2009 3:42 PM

this house sold for about 800k in 2004.

Posted by: FixtheCanal at September 9, 2009 2:34 PM


Pretty much says it all, now don't it?

Guess people still believe they're entitled to a nifty 300% profit in 5 years during the worst real estate collapse since the Great Depression.

Pity the sucker who gives them anywhere near close to that. 1.6 Mil max makes the investment a one-bagger, they should be thrilled to pieces.

Posted by: MoneyForNothing at September 9, 2009 4:37 PM

The house was derelict and uninhabitable in 2004.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 9, 2009 4:49 PM

Fantastic location but the house itself is mediocre in quality and tiny....dollhouse?? Not sure but $2.3million is still massively over priced even for Brooklyn Heights...~around $1.8 may do it but who knows.

Wasder aged wide plank floors can be bought and installed @ a fairly reasonable.

Posted by: pierre de taille at September 9, 2009 5:16 PM

Boerumresident:

I don't know how much 31 Joralemon went into contract for, but it was very very close to the BQE, and you could hear cars zooming by loudly. To me, it completely ruined the habitability of the home. (I'm sensitive to noise). It also needed a complete gut renovation, I was told by the realtor. Nevertheless, I bet it went into contract for close to the 1.5 asking price. Great location if you're not sensitive to noise.

40 Joralemon, although only a few houses away (and on the other side of the street), is not too terribly close to the BQE. I think that, under normal conditions, you can't hear, from 40 Joralemon, the traffic on the BQE. But I'm not sure. Does that part of the BQE get backed up with horns-a-honking?

Posted by: brownlime at September 9, 2009 6:36 PM

The only time you can really hear the BQE from any of the adjacent streets is in the middle of the night. That is when there is little traffic and the trucks can zoom at 70 miles an hour and make quite a bit of noise. If you are sensitive to noise, you should not live here or near any busy artery. Or, live in a newly redone loft building like One BBP or One Main Street with airtight windows and central air. There are pros and cons to city life.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 9, 2009 6:59 PM

From 31 Joralemon, you can hear the BQE 24/7. And yes, 31 is in need of a complete gut.

36 Joralemon, to the right of the posted home, is currently for sale for 3.8m. How's that for overpriced?

Posted by: buttermilk channel at September 9, 2009 7:11 PM

Correction: I went by this house this afternoon. While you can say it's a "block" from the BQE, it's a pretty short block. You can hear the highway noise more than I expected. I'm used to it being recessed as it is by my house, not an overpass as it is by Jeralemon. Plus, I'm a longer block away. This would be a problem for me, even a deal breaker. Too bad, because the the block is lovely otherwise. You know, if you're a weirdo who likes quaint cobblestone streets . . .

Posted by: Nomi at September 9, 2009 7:50 PM

noise from the BQE is the bane of Brooklyn Heights, kind of like muggings and stray bullets are the bane of Fort Greene and Clinton Hill.


Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 9, 2009 8:08 PM

But it must be better where it's sunken under The Promenade, yes?

Posted by: Nomi at September 9, 2009 8:13 PM

(Hey, you didn't have to bash Fort Greene and Clinton Hill!)

Posted by: Nomi at September 9, 2009 8:20 PM

...."noise from the bqe is the bane of bklyn heights" really? r u looking at a map of bklyn heights or have u spent any time in bklyn heights?? if there's a "bane" to the Heights it's car and pedestrian traffic related to courts Monday thru Fri...Clinton St is clogged. BQE becomes a factor on Hicks St in Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens..the noise in this area is secondary to all the Staten Island/secondary traffic that blows thru at 40-50 mph....BQE noise in my humble opinion is only really an issue in DUMBO where there r no barriers to noise or exhaust fumes...i've lived in area 14 yrs...BQE noise is barely noticeable in Heights even standing in middle of Promenade..

Posted by: bklyn14 at September 9, 2009 9:18 PM

Well, that was kind of my point -- the Promenade itself physically cuts down on some of the BQE noise. Further south, like where this house is, there is no protection at all. It's freakin loud.

Posted by: Nomi at September 9, 2009 9:54 PM

yes, I bet when you walk down the street you can hear traffic on BQE - but when inside a house unless all windows in front are wide open can hear that well. But - I bet the cars going down the cobblestone street are much noisier than anything from the BQE.
It amazes me how people are determined to find negatives about any property. I wonder where do you people live that is such nirvana. There are probably 2 houses on 2 blocks in all of NYC that could satisfy you. Too far, too close. I really think that you don't like NewYork.

Posted by: Petebklyn at September 10, 2009 9:33 AM

Argh! Recessed lighting! WHY WHY WHY! (Sorry, this is my pet peeve of the century. It's hideous McMansion design in my book.)

Posted by: lucille at September 10, 2009 2:04 PM

Petebklyn:
Take a walk near 31 Joralemon and you will agree with Nomi that the BQE is very loud there. It's not similar to most of Brooklyn Heights, and it's not normal or typical NYC noise. You don't need any "determination to find negatives" to hear how loud it is.

Posted by: brownlime at September 10, 2009 3:05 PM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions