« Condo of the Day: 189 Bridge Street, #13D StreetLevel: Ghang Opens Court Street Outpost »

September 22, 2009

House of the Day: 297 Vanderbilt Avenue

The four-story brownstone at 297 Vanderbilt Avenue was on the market for a while in 2007, but never sold. That might have had something to do with the asking price at the time, which started at $2,000,000 and dropped to $1,800,000 before begin pulled off the market. The odds are looking must better now for the two-family house: It just hit the market asking $1,495,000. Seems pretty reasonable to us for a classic brownstone in this location with all of its original details intact. Agree?
297 Vanderbilt Avenue [Douglas Elliman] GMAP P*Shark

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/11525

Comments

"with original museum quality details"
Yes, when I look at this house the Louvre comes to mind.

Posted by: Expert Textpert at September 22, 2009 1:19 PM

That seems inexpensive - maybe they are hoping for multiple bids? I wish them all the best, it is lovely. Though the broker page could use some beefing up and it is Fort Greene (not ForT Green).

Posted by: amybnyc at September 22, 2009 1:21 PM

I think this ask is spot on. Great location, nice looking bones. Flexible configuration. This should sell for very close to ask.

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 1:26 PM

this is good test to gauge where mkt is at currently. good looking place, ask and location.

Posted by: more4less at September 22, 2009 1:34 PM

Now this is a nice looking house. Glad to see the pricing has moved into he reasonable range.

Posted by: TownhouseLady at September 22, 2009 1:38 PM

M4L--agreed. What was your widget prediction?

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 1:40 PM

They say the apartment's on the garden floor, but they must mean the forth floor, yes?

Posted by: Nomi at September 22, 2009 1:41 PM

it was priced too high for it's size. 1.5 is about right.

Posted by: jack slade at September 22, 2009 1:41 PM

Having the kitchen on the top floor seems like an odd choice. Who wants to lug the groceries all the way up there?

Posted by: DitmasSnark at September 22, 2009 1:41 PM

Noce.....but is it me or is the layout less than optimal?

Posted by: moreteasir at September 22, 2009 1:42 PM

narrow house with tight layout. It doesn't have the central stair that improves these narrow layouts a lot. Nine-foot-wide rooms are not pleasant. It needs a little partition removal to make it nicer. The price seems about right -I guess, that is if anyone is buying anything at any price. Sometimes I wonder.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 22, 2009 1:43 PM

nomi--the strangest thing about the house is the fact that the two kitchens are on garden and 4th floor respectively. Either way you could have a triplex with one bedroom rental but if you made the garden the rental you would have your kitchen on the top floor. far from ideal, but this is priced so that moving a kitchen is not a hardship.

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 1:43 PM

weird layout, narrow house. pass.

Posted by: bkny at September 22, 2009 1:44 PM

THE WHAT!

This one's for you: http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/09/why-are-banks-paying-signing-bonus-so-early/

Someday this war’s gonna end…

Posted by: lalaland at September 22, 2009 1:45 PM

Just one more nitpick this house was not built in 1899.
Nobody built houses faced with brownstone in 1899. After the World's Columbian Exposition of 1892, limestone became the favored facade material. The detailing on this house dates to the late 1870's-early 1880's. Realtors should take a mini class at the Municipal Ar Society or buy a book or something.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 22, 2009 1:47 PM

"The price seems about right -I guess, that is if anyone is buying anything at any price."

In prime Ft Greene/Clinton Hill as this house is, this price is definitely priced to sell. I know of another sale at this price point on St James that will be announced within the next few days.

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 1:49 PM

Agreed that 15' wide is pretty narrow. Also, it can't be 3100 square feet if its four floors 15x40 each. Some justifiable nitpicking as one examines the listing. Probably more like 2500 square feet total.

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 1:52 PM

RE agents/agencies seem to do little proof-reading or honest-to-good research...except white glove agents like Mr. Carberry. I too find the typos on these ads very tiresome. It just smacks of slapdash and give-me-the-money-now.

Posted by: BrooklynGreene at September 22, 2009 1:52 PM

wasder, I guessed 1.35M.

Posted by: more4less at September 22, 2009 1:56 PM

right, give me the money now! exactly.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 22, 2009 1:56 PM

M4L--we are playing our roles to a T then! 1.475.

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 1:57 PM

I guessed $1.35 MM as well.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 1:58 PM

Looks nice but the tiny kitchen on the top floor is weird. I'd want to move it to the parlor.

Posted by: brownstoner newbie at September 22, 2009 1:58 PM

wasder if this house was on Saint James it would be worth much less. This is a much better block

Posted by: bitter_bubble_buyer at September 22, 2009 1:59 PM

1.25, take it or leave it. the house needs a lot of renovation.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 22, 2009 1:59 PM

Seems like a lot of money for a narrow, claustrophobic house. Locations seems pretty good, but still...

Posted by: DitmasSnark at September 22, 2009 1:59 PM

"wasder if this house was on Saint James it would be worth much less. This is a much better block"

It would be worth marginally less I think. The house on St James that sold for this price point was a nicer, better maintained and wider house. And actually the blocks of St James between Lafayette and Gates are prettier by far than this block of Vanderbilt. But of course the proximity to the DeKalb strip is what makes the Vanderbilt house valuable.

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 2:02 PM

Wasder are you talking abut the house that just went into foreclosure on Saint James?

Posted by: bitter_bubble_buyer at September 22, 2009 2:07 PM

I'm lower than team reasonable founder wasder by 125k but same as perma bull DIBS. DIBS, did you switch teams?

to be clear, "I" would low-ball it if I were to make an offer. currently feel no incentive to offer mkt price to buy something while mkt is still dripping.

agree with Wasder those blks on st james are definitely prettier but nevertheless is less valueable price-wise

Posted by: more4less at September 22, 2009 2:13 PM

"with original museum quality details"

Offer to pay what you can.

Posted by: Biff Champion at September 22, 2009 2:15 PM

bbb---don't think the house I am talking about was in foreclosure but not sure.

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 2:18 PM

Overall, this house is pretty similar to 396 Vanderbilt in terms of size, location, and needing a bit of TLC (but not too much.) I don't believe 396 sold even though it was asking 1,295,000.

Posted by: Maly at September 22, 2009 2:19 PM

ML- isn't this too dangerous a neighborhood too?

also, the prop is 17.17 x 45. 15 is inside dimension.
they'll get interest at this price.

personally i'd rather have a kitchen in the rear parlor and build a deck off the back. in this well-preserved house that would be borderline criminal. but who wants to live in a huge house with a galley kitchen on the 4th floor?

Posted by: antidope at September 22, 2009 2:19 PM

M4L--aren't you usually slightly under my predictions? Also, DIBS probably read the floor plan more carefully than I did. I made my bid before noticing the 15 foot wide aspect. However, I still think that is a reasonable price for a decent looking house in that location and I am confident that the actual sale price will exceed the widget as usual and be quite close to ask.

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 2:20 PM

The folks who are making a cluster of bids under a mil are quite delusional...

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 2:21 PM

I think it will sell to someone at $1.35MM but I'm having problems with the floorplan. I'd probably move the kitchen to the parlour level and use the top floor plumbing for an ensuite master bath.

But I don't need three floors for myself and I don't want to share the parlour level entrance with tenants.

The garden level would be nice to rent out but needs some reconfiguring.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 2:22 PM

wasder, that must be Miss Muffett and friends. Wishing will not make it so.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 2:32 PM

wasder, it was perma bull DIBS's bid matching mine is what's throwing me off - ie he's usually higher than both of us.

didn't a 20 footer on vanderbilt (closer to greene ave) sell recently after it dropped price to 1.4M?

Posted by: more4less at September 22, 2009 2:35 PM

> Wishing will not make it so.

Perhaps not, but waiting will.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at September 22, 2009 2:36 PM

Not trying to speak for DIBS but I think he is a pretty shrewd reader of floor plans and other particularities of a listing. While he is a bull, his bullishness is more generalized than always making a high bid on any given property. What do you think Dave?

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 2:39 PM

But why would a kitchen ever be put on a forth floor unless that floor was being rented out? If they didn't want to ruin the parlor floor architecture, AND the garden floor was a rental, why not stick the funny kitchen on the third floor at least?

Posted by: Nomi at September 22, 2009 2:45 PM

At first I thought the price was an amazing deal until I saw how narrow it is. Also it is a busy block. That said, I think it can easily achieve the ask, and probably will go for more.

Posted by: 1842 at September 22, 2009 2:46 PM

"Perhaps not, but waiting will."

How long are you willing to wait Snark? Just curious? You seem to be in the position of waiting without cramping your domestic style. Some people are not in the same boat.

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 2:51 PM

Yes, wasder, even during the bubble I did not pay full ask for my ghetto brownstone.

I think asking prices are irrelevant during ANY market. I think this place in this nabe will go for $1.35MM. No bathroom pics is a red flag though. It needs a deck, a kitchen move and maybe two bathrooms...$100-120,000

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 2:56 PM

there are a couple of better buildings around with same price. That said, the price makes it unaffordable to a $300K couple. Said couple needs to send kids to private and be landlords. From the $12K or so of the monthly aftertax income $7K needs to go to housing. Only a fool will buy but the people in here think there are many left of those.

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 3:08 PM

Overall, this house is pretty similar to 396 Vanderbilt in terms of size, location, and needing a bit of TLC (but not too much.) I don't believe 396 sold even though it was asking 1,295,000.

Posted by: Maly at September 22, 2009 2:19 PM
---------------------

Having been to 396 VB (http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2008/02/house_of_the_da_454.php), which is nothing short of an anatomy of a disaster, and in need of a complete gut reno, I'd say this place is a far cry from that wreck.

Not even fair to call them comps. Interestingly, they both started out in the 2 million range. Not surprisingly, they've both received massive haircuts. And this stretch of Vanderbilt is sketchy, but lined with great housing stock.

This one prices comparably to 2 places on Clermont I've visited (202, 190) of similar quality, right between them actually. Both those seem nice, but a bit high, and one has sat for an extremely long time.

Places of this high quality at a reasonable price in almost any nabe will move though. It seems always for abt 8-10% or so below ask based on properties I've tracked recently.

Kudos to the sellers, albeit 2 years too late for them to not have shed massive amounts of potential profit, for getting in front of the market by pricing more in line with buyers' ability and interest to do the deal.

If wanted to shed my savings to move in Fort Greene and raise my daughter in the public school system there, I'd make an offer of about 20% below ask. After 2 yrs on the market, even at reduced asking price, have to assume psychology of seller is more motivated than usual.

One small question I have that is never listed in comp sales: how many sales include concession by seller to float all or most of the 1% mansion tax these days? Adding 13-15K to the price of a home like this is not insignificant.

Posted by: MoneyForNothing at September 22, 2009 3:13 PM

Only a fool will buy but the people in here think there are many left of those.

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 3:08 PM

It seems that the fools are the only ones with money.

Many fools have built up equity in places that they've owned for 9-12 years.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 3:14 PM

MFN,
Not moving to Fort Greene any time soon? Oh well.

Posted by: BrooklynGreene at September 22, 2009 3:18 PM

Whoever said it above is right. Those posting below $1.0MM have no clue.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 3:20 PM

Extremely expensive to heat, given its position on the end of the row. Not to mention the neighbor's never-ending construction project.

I think that the upper kitchen is more of a 'snack kitchen' -- I don't think that the current owners used it as a 2-fam, and if so, only with relatives.

Posted by: thwackamole1 at September 22, 2009 3:29 PM

@Dave:"It seems that the fools are the only ones with money."

Nice.

Posted by: Nomi at September 22, 2009 3:31 PM

Considering Minard Lafever's quote regarding 135 Lafayette yesterday, I don't think she will be moving to Ft. Greene anytime soon...

"I don't like this location, I don't think it's safe. that's all. I don't see why I should spend my hard-earned money to live somewhere where I can expect to be mugged and robbed. No thank you."

Posted by: 11217 at September 22, 2009 3:32 PM

center stair makes the floorplan a lot more open and allows for nice full width bedrooms, but is sf always calculated by the outer dimensions of the bldg? This place has 3100 sf by the lot lines, but interior space is at least 400sf less.

Posted by: Frederick Law Homestead at September 22, 2009 3:36 PM

Minard's a she?

Posted by: Nomi at September 22, 2009 3:38 PM

I thought Minard was a he. Montrose Morris is a she.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 3:41 PM

@Dave:"It seems that the fools are the only ones with money."

Nice.

----------

Funny, I'm sitting on about $800K in cash I earned every penny of by starting my own graphic design studio and have nary a penny of debt.

I don't feel foolish...

Posted by: MoneyForNothing at September 22, 2009 3:48 PM

if this baby doesnt sell around 1.3-1.4M, who will I be fighting with when I try to low ball it at 999k? dont worry, I wont shove in an all-cash offer

Posted by: more4less at September 22, 2009 3:56 PM

It wasn't you who said it, MFN, it was bklplebe.

However, with mortgage rates at these levels, it is beginning to look foolish not to have one.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 3:56 PM

"Funny, I'm sitting on about $800K in cash"

With this money you could have bought a brownstone in Prime Brooklyn in perfect condition with cash ten years ago. These people here ask you to get a debt of as much as you saved, be a landlord, pay private for a so so building needing a reno in a fringe area. All in a much worse economy than 10 years ago.

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 4:00 PM

"I think that the upper kitchen is more of a 'snack kitchen'"

That's alot of snacks!
Odd location for a kitchen in a 2-family. This house is best used as a one-family.

Posted by: Expert Textpert at September 22, 2009 4:01 PM

However, with mortgage rates at these levels, it is beginning to look foolish not to have one.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 3:56 PM

-----

Couldn't agree more...

If you're willing to lose equity short-term, the federal government is nothing short of begging you to take on debt by reflating every asset class, primarily housing, at every turn.

I'll apologize to my daughter for the debt service her generation will be paying off for us when she's old enough to understand...

Posted by: MoneyForNothing at September 22, 2009 4:02 PM

MFN-did you build a tent in your living room with your benjamins? it's not like you accept the 1% return the bank is offering since it is probably not safe. also, do you talk to your kids about the world the way you talk here? Yuk yuk yuk. you'd be better off spending a few on a therapist to work through your self-image issues. but thanks for sharing your personality. it's always a swell read.

Posted by: antidope at September 22, 2009 4:06 PM

"However, with mortgage rates at these levels, it is beginning to look foolish not to have one."

We will surely enjoy those low rates for many years to come while prices are getting lower.

If not then we will enjoy high rates just the same as re will be crushed immediately.

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 4:07 PM

"With this money you could have bought a brownstone in Prime Brooklyn in perfect condition with cash ten years ago. These people here ask you to get a debt of as much as you saved, be a landlord, pay private for a so so building needing a reno in a fringe area. All in a much worse economy than 10 years ago."

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 4:00 PM

---------

Exactly, and thank you.

Posted by: MoneyForNothing at September 22, 2009 4:11 PM

Antidope, to be fair. I'm making nice returns on my pile of cash which I suspect is the case with MFN - far far better than folks who bought houses recently. Currently, not buying is the financial winner. if future changes, yeah, we'll eat our words.

Posted by: more4less at September 22, 2009 4:13 PM

Some people's lack of understanding when it comes to interest rates, cost of money, opportunity cost, long term financial planning and real estate in general ON A REAL ESTATE BLOG is truly mind-boggling.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 4:16 PM

making money- no problem.
getting rich- no problem.
needing to tell other people how much you have- pathetic.

Posted by: antidope at September 22, 2009 4:17 PM

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 4:00 PM

With $800,000 you could get a house for $1.2-1.3 MM and the rent from a ground floor one bedroom would pay half the mortgage (@ $1,400-1,500 in this nabe) and you'd have far more space and a yard than you would for what you are currently most likely paying in rent...unless you are living in a studio.

Furthermore, you can pay the mortgage off in 15++ years and live rent free for the rest of your life.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 4:19 PM

antidope, that's fair point

Posted by: more4less at September 22, 2009 4:28 PM

> How long are you willing to wait Snark?

My current timeline is two years. I'm currently in no rush.

It seems to me that past history indicates that these sorts of corrections are multi-year affairs, and any cries of "we've hit bottom" are premature.

However, if it looks like the market has stopped dropping and is going back up before then, I'll jump sooner.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at September 22, 2009 4:35 PM

I reiterate my belief that brownstone prices will have bottomed by the end of the year. I think they will start climbing in late 2010, gradually.

I think that history tells us that the Fed will keep short-term rates low.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 4:38 PM

"With $800,000 you could get a house for $1.2-1.3 MM and the rent from a ground floor one bedroom would pay half the mortgage (@ $1,400-1,500 in this nabe) and you'd have far more space and a yard than you would for what you are currently most likely paying in rent...unless you are living in a studio.

Furthermore, you can pay the mortgage off in 15++ years and live rent free for the rest of your life."

You forget maintenance, property taxes, renovation costs, closing costs, private tuition, time spent in being landlord, etc.

You forget that people stay on average 7 years in a house during which neither the mortgage will be paid off nor your equity is assured (most probably your 1.3m will cost less).

If it made sense people would have jumped in just like 10 years ago.

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 4:39 PM

MFN, that's a bit severe for 396 VB. I went to the open house and it definitely needed TLC, in fact it looked as if someone had started and then ran out of energy (not even just about money, because some of the stuff could have been fixed with paint and materials lying about.) Anyway, I thought it was too much money for a project. I haven't seen the HOTD, but from the pictures and description, I think there is just about the same amount of money and effort to be put into it, even if at first glance it's cosmetically more together.

Posted by: Maly at September 22, 2009 4:43 PM

"I reiterate my belief that brownstone prices will have bottomed by the end of the year. I think they will start climbing in late 2010, gradually."

this could have been a good joke if you were not posting it twice daily

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 4:45 PM

No renovation necessary. Taxes included in that estimate of monthly at $2,800-3,000.

Tuition needs to be paid wherever you are...not a part of the real estate transaction. I'm a landlord in my unit...virtually no time spent doing anything. Maintaining my yard is the biggest thing.

For $1.2-1.3MM in that nabe you can get a fully rehabbed building, all new roof, plumbing, heating, elctrical...virtually no outlays for many years.

The averages of how long people stay are just that.

don't knock it until you've tried it. I've been doing it since 1985 in many different places and have made money on every single one of them. Some as little as two years. That may or may not happen right now but if you think that a buyer now will not make money over the next seven years then you are truly clueless.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 4:46 PM

"I reiterate my belief that brownstone prices will have bottomed by the end of the year. I think they will start climbing in late 2010, gradually."

this could have been a good joke if you were not posting it twice daily

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 4:45 PM

If you want to read some real jokes, go back and read some of your own analytical nonsense on whether or not long term home ownership is a good idea.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 4:51 PM

"I've been doing it since 1985 in many different places and have made money on every single one of them. Some as little as two years. That may or may not happen right now but if you think that a buyer now will not make money over the next seven years then you are truly clueless."

you forgot that the re bubble was the highest recorded and this economy/unemployment is the worst since the war. Otherwise what a great opportunity. hurry, hurry!

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 4:53 PM

> brownstone prices will have bottomed by the end of the year.

Hmmm, no, not seeing it. You seem to have just chosen a date with no real data or thesis to support your assertion. But I will happily eat my hat should you be proven correct.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at September 22, 2009 4:53 PM

I started in 1985. There was quite a down market in the early 90s. I still did well.

Perhaps you are too young to remember, but that's no excuse for not knowing the history of the market if you are going to talk about the history of the market.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 4:57 PM

"If you want to read some real jokes, go back and read some of your own analytical nonsense on whether or not long term home ownership is a good idea."

relax--I appreciate your home ownership ideal--not at this price point.

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 4:58 PM

I'm not saying they will start to go up then, Snark, just stop falling by the end of the year.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 4:58 PM

Maly,

I just thought the house was a complete wreck.

I'm not sure when you visited it, but I went early this year, and it was in shambles. Staircases falling apart, every room but one bathroom a complete wreck, kitchens on both floors a disaster, front door didn;t even work, the broker had to slip me the key through the mail slot to open it.

Asking price then was $1.5 Million.

Great bones, but I'd guess $500K in renovations needed head to toe to make it a polished property, and that's without considering what might be lurking in the mechanicals. And it is *not* on a great block. The housing stock there is nice, but it is sketchy and I wouldn't feel safe having my little girl walk around late at night there.

For that commitment of money (and time) plus risk, it needs to go for under a million. It's way too close to other properties that need little to no work in the nabe to be taken seriously.

Posted by: MoneyForNothing at September 22, 2009 5:00 PM

relax--I appreciate your home ownership ideal--not at this price point.

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 4:58 PM

Will you be ready to buy when you think prices have bottomed. And how will you know they've bottomed? You can only know that after they start rising so, by definition, you will have missed hte bottom. Will you have a mortgage commitment in hand. pay all cash???

Will the right place even be on the market then??

BTW, how old are you?? it does make a differeence as to whether you should or should not buy yet, to a certain degree.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 5:01 PM

MFN...I think you're right on that place. Unless we're talking a very special place in Ft Greene (of which there are quite a number), an ordinary brownstone is really going to top out at $1.2-1.4 max in the current market.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 5:07 PM

"You can only know that after they start rising so, by definition, you will have missed hte bottom. "

However, houses are not small cap stocks. You're not likely to lose a lot of upside potential by being 2-3 months behind the eventual upturn.

And since a double-dip reduction in prices is highly unlikely, you definitely have far more risk in going in too early in a downward market, since the bottom could be months and months away before the slow, eventual uptick.

Posted by: MoneyForNothing at September 22, 2009 5:10 PM

Excuse me, pardon me, psst Snark, we need you in the OT.

Posted by: cobblehiller at September 22, 2009 5:23 PM

"Will the right place even be on the market then??"

Absolute bottom is hard to call--you will know you are near by the discussions here, no bitter renters. But as mfn said plenty of time.
Also whenever I thought this is the right place another one came which felt more appropriate.

Posted by: bklplebe at September 22, 2009 5:29 PM

MFN, I saw it in April or May, the price was 1,395 then they reduced to 1,295 the following month or so. It still needed work (esp. in the garden rental), but nothing that couldn't haven't been polished beautifully with $100,000 and lots of elbow grease.
I actually really liked the block, on the edge of carriage houses. But! I thought the house lacked charm and for that price I wasn't looking to live in a construction site for 3 months+. For under a million I would put up with it. Maybe.

Posted by: Maly at September 22, 2009 5:42 PM

DIBS, isn't some context helpful here? This was a historic bubble in RE. Why is past performance any guide? You sound like a "Stocks for the Long Run" guru when Naz was at 5000; saying things that are true, but beside the point. OK, the guv wants to reflate, at any cost; and so maybe taking on massive debt is a fine idea, as the dollars you pay it back with get cheaper and cheaper. Or maybe the guv isn't to be trusted, in intent or competence, and if they flub this, you, new mortgage taker, could be a major bagholder. Why be SO sure buying a house is a no brainer? It makes you sound like you're only talking your book (surely you don't have our best interests in mind) and slightly hysterical, at that.

Posted by: Whuh at September 22, 2009 6:40 PM

Prices on this block have gone up at roughly 10.5%/year over the past 30 years. They went up at roughly 1.5%/year over the preceding 120 years.

In 1980, this house was worth about 10-12 decent pickup trucks. Today it is priced at 40 pickup trucks.

Even adjusting for the huge drop in interest rates (9% drop) the total return on this house is north of 8%/year over the last 30 years. This is a crazy return for a pile of bricks.

This house is roughly the same size as the average American house, but is priced at 6-7x the average price.

The average household income on the block is not all that high -- perhaps 150k. This puts the house at 8-9x incomes.

You would have trouble getting more than 2200 for the ground floor rental; the top floors would be worth less.

Conclusion: Likely to lag inflation for quite some time.

Posted by: thwackamole1 at September 22, 2009 7:47 PM

minard lafever is correct that brownstone was out of fashion after the Columbian Exposition,but there are plenty of 1899 brownstones on my block, built alongside limestones, by the same builder (W.A.A. Brown). There are also many brownstones in PLG built as late as c.1910. Some people had conservative taste.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at September 22, 2009 11:31 PM

The house is definitely not in shambles. New gas heating, strong staircase, very nice detail, historic light fixtures. The current furniture does not help envisioning it as a bright airy home. It is narrow, there are no windows facing North despite the fact that there is no property preventing it, and the layout is plain weird. The tenant still has one year on his lease, so that is another issue. The deck is old and needs some TLC. Cheap closets, bad kitchen, and the bathrooms need some work.
Overall, not as nice as 202 Clermont, definitely not moving condition, so I think it will sell for less, unless someone falls in love with it.

Posted by: spqrxxi at September 25, 2009 10:36 AM

« Condo of the Day: 189 Bridge Street, #13D StreetLevel: Ghang Opens Court Street Outpost »

September 22, 2009

House of the Day: 297 Vanderbilt Avenue

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions