« Co-op of the Day: 214 Carlton Avenue, #2 StreetLevel: Black Horse Pub Finally Opens »
October 22, 2009
House of the Day: 177 Rugby Road

This house at 177 Rugby Road in Prospect House South is a beauty (we're sold on the basis of that staircase alone!) but it's been on the market longer than just about any house in the borough that we can think of. We featured it has a House of the Day way back in 2006 when it was listed for $2,500,000; after a year off the market, the house just came back on again with an asking price of $1,800,000, but obviously they started too high and didn't cut fast enough. Now what? Where does it end?
Colonial Revival Home [Mary Kay Gallagher] GMAP P*Shark
House of the Day: Rugby Road Mansion [Brownstoner]
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/11964
Comments
Except for the staircase it's an architectural YAWN.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 22, 2009 1:16 PM
Staircase, cornice and teh yard are lovely. Not so for the rest. Though at $5500 taxes are cheap.
Posted by: DeLepp at October 22, 2009 1:18 PM
I LOVE that staircase! Beautiful curb appeal as well. Other rooms, not so much.
Posted by: Nokilissa at October 22, 2009 1:20 PM
There is a ghastly split-level house directly across the street. I assume it replaced a house that burned down. Would not want to look at it everyday as I walked out of this house.
Posted by: Suburbandude at October 22, 2009 1:21 PM
Saw this on the Victorian Flatbush tour. The staircase is amazing. It's a nice house, without a lot of flash, and the family has been there a long time, and the house has lots of memories for them. It's on a very nice block, too.
As for price, $2.5M was absurd, I have no idea what people would pay now, but they will certainly have a huge one family. I'm betting if it sells this time they'll get a million less than first asking price, which still is a lot of money.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at October 22, 2009 1:24 PM
here's my 2 cents
agreed the exterior and curb appeal are beautifully done
the staircase amazing
but am surprised all you folks aren't sticking up for the interiors "good bones" -
I mean the inside is blah and needs some updates and renos but I think you could do a lot with the place
the price though is crazytown!!!!
Posted by: gemini10 at October 22, 2009 1:24 PM
this house is in Brooklyn not in Greenwich or Chappaqua. two million dollars is a stretch.
Posted by: Minard Lafever at October 22, 2009 1:24 PM
Still overpriced by half a million clams.
Posted by: DitmasSnark at October 22, 2009 1:32 PM
If they can get it down to the $400k range, I'll take a look! Maybe even $410k -- since it would be an easy move up the road a bit.
Posted by: tybur6 at October 22, 2009 1:35 PM
This is one of those houses that could benefit from some staging. It looks way fuddy-duddier than it has to and I feel like that is a sales killer. If it was photographed empty or at least massively stripped of the owners belongings (super minimalist) the space would show a lot better. Its a pretty sweet house. Now, do I think they are still over priced. OF course. But I do think that photos that didn't look like grandmas house would help. 1.3 and better photos and away she goes says I.
Posted by: wasder at October 22, 2009 1:37 PM
gemini10--your point above is exactly what I am talking about. People are getting bogged down in the interior decor and missing the bones.
Posted by: wasder at October 22, 2009 1:39 PM
Very nice, but they should remove the shag rug in the dining room, and the kitchen needs updating (by the buyers). As for the price, don't houses of this size in Victorian Flatbush go for, say, $1.2 or $1.3? Or am I out of date?
Also, I think this was the one where the parlor seemed cut off from the rest of the house, but maybe you could fix that by opening the pocket doors I think they closed up. (Or is this the one with the neat-o original sink in marble between the two front bedrooms?)
Posted by: mopar at October 22, 2009 1:42 PM
tybur6, I would bid 420k on you then.
remove the leading "1" on the price please
Posted by: more4less at October 22, 2009 1:44 PM
wasder - exactly!
Posted by: gemini10 at October 22, 2009 1:45 PM
I saw this house on the vic flatbush house tour as well and these photos definitely don't do it justice! I dunno. Maybe they had help with staging for the tour that is not evident in these photos. But, there is way more to like/love about this place than what you see here. Given size, location, details, etc., I would think that a selling price of 1.5M is likely in the ballpark.
Posted by: Brooklynista at October 22, 2009 1:45 PM
In person, it seemed kind of unappealing because the center stair seems closed up, the rooms appear very separated, and the ceilings don't seem very high! But I could be mixing this one up with another house, and also better staging could help, as Wasder points out.
Posted by: mopar at October 22, 2009 1:46 PM
m4l -- can you beat $425!?
Posted by: tybur6 at October 22, 2009 1:48 PM
tybur6, 430.
kidding aside, this is reason why you would still need to save up a ton even if prices tank. there'll always be someone(s) with a big war chest triggering bidding wars.
Posted by: more4less at October 22, 2009 1:59 PM
I hate you m4l... all I wanted is a little 3,500 sq ft home to call my own. Maybe I can win over the sellers with my smoooove talk.
Posted by: tybur6 at October 22, 2009 2:03 PM
$455
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 22, 2009 2:04 PM
brooklynista--good to know. But speaks to my point above for sure. It does look like this is a really nice house that is not showing well in these pictures, therefore limiting their market before they ever get in the door.
Posted by: wasder at October 22, 2009 2:05 PM
DIBS, all-cash
Posted by: more4less at October 22, 2009 2:06 PM
I like this house (agree that the decorating doesn't help its sale) but I think the area doesn't support such a price. In this marketplace, there is plenty to buy and at reduced prices. I think that this is not the greatest area to plunk down major cash, no matter how nice the house.
Posted by: donatella at October 22, 2009 2:11 PM
Prospect House South? Real estate blog equivalent of a freudian slip?
Posted by: lalaland at October 22, 2009 2:12 PM
this house in a suburb, say Montclair or Croton, would not ask more than 800K
widget does not go low enough
Posted by: bklplebe at October 22, 2009 2:16 PM
I have to agree - the pricing is sooooo ridiculous and I would say offensive
I mean 1.8 for PPS??? and for this house that you will have to at least put $200K to get it up to modern day standards
huh????
I mean you can find a gorgeous 4 story brownstone in Park Slope for that amount
hells you can find a sprawling house in the tony burbs for LESS than that!
Posted by: gemini10 at October 22, 2009 2:26 PM
A house in the tony burbs will have r.e. taxes in the 25-30,000 a year range. But if you have a couple of kids, it's worth it. What are the public schools like in PPS? Any close-by private schools? I think the person most likely to buy this house is the one with a couple of kids.
Posted by: Minard Lafever at October 22, 2009 2:34 PM
You're right Gemini... PPSouth and Ditmas Park sucks big time and the prices should be slashed if they expect anyone to live here... err... there.
(I'm trying to keep my rent down.)
Posted by: tybur6 at October 22, 2009 2:35 PM
"A house in the tony burbs will have r.e. taxes in the 25-30,000 a year range."
I don't think so
I would say more like $15K (no land here)
This argument about property taxes is ridiculous. An income of $300K that is needed to support a $900K purchase is taxed $10K by the city. In addition you need to pay $6K property taxes. Suburbans do not pay city taxes! At the end it works the same.
Posted by: bklplebe at October 22, 2009 2:41 PM
ok, let't get this straight...this house is in Flatbush. Got it? FLATBUSH!!! I live here, it's great. I am so sick of this renaming of neighborhoods in order to detach themselves from a neighborhood that is considered "undesirable". Ditmas Park?! Prospect Park South?! It's Flatbush.
Posted by: neuroticalways at October 22, 2009 2:41 PM
I haven't been to this part of Park Slope South (aka Flatbush).
But it looks like a suburb.
Does it feel like a suburb, too?
Posted by: Pigeon at October 22, 2009 2:51 PM
Neurotical... I agree, I tell people flatbush. But flatbush is really big (especially if you include "East Flatbush") -- so it doesn't narrow it down very much.
Where do you live? Flatbush. Sort of like Bushwick and Bed-Stuy... they're huge. We happen to have these silly sub-units to help narrow it down. And actually, some of them "Ditmas Park" and "Beverly Square" are very old names. Not invented realtors 5 years ago.
Posted by: tybur6 at October 22, 2009 2:52 PM
Wow, I have never heard anyone describe PPS as anything but a great area! While I'll never get seriously involved in the pricing/widget game, I've always been under the impression that houses in PPS could generally command much more on the market than other nabes in Vic Flatbush. (Sorry, neuroticalways, I hear you about the obnoxious renaming game and don't mean to play into it. But. . . there are long established pricing differences within Flatbush -- or most nabes for that matter -- whether we like it or not.)
Posted by: Brooklynista at October 22, 2009 2:53 PM
It DOES feel like a suburb! And 25 mins from Union Sq. Trees and little lawns and such. But don't move there, it's a hell hole. Actually don't even visit, you'll probably be shot.
(And it's Prospect Park South, not Park Slope South... which I think is what Bay Ridge is called now according to the real estate folks.)
Posted by: tybur6 at October 22, 2009 2:55 PM
Prospect Park South is architecturally and planning-wise rather different from the rest of the Victorian Flatbush neighborhoods and is designated as such by LPC. Pretty much the whole area was laid out by Alvord along different planning ideals than other parts of Flatbush.
Posted by: Boerumresident at October 22, 2009 3:05 PM
remember that house about half this size that sold for 1.2M, to that couple with the chinese daughter - its was a NYT & brownstoner write up. this house is way bigger & in that same hood. granted prices have dropped but i still think this will go for at least 1.5. Ebinger bakery house is "in contract" with an ask of 1.599M.
Posted by: bkny at October 22, 2009 3:06 PM
Oh, definitely don't visit, we shoot folks on site out here in the badlands! Jes' fer lookin' at us the wrong way!
But seriously...yes, it is Flatbush, of course, one could even say (if one had been drinking a bit) The Jewel in the Flatbushian Crown, but it's pretty legit to describe it as Prospect Park South because that is a circumscribed historic district (within the glorious realm of Greater Flatbush).
Seems like just a few years ago that folks were SHOCKED the first time a PPS house was listed for $1 million or over. These mansions were actually quite undervalued for many years, then reality caught up. Now after the boom I guess it's catching up again, the other way. I've never been inside on the tour, but the exterior is kind of curious even by the eclectic standards of PPS: a sort of chalky, blank "expression" on its neo-Classical face, not quite the same vibe as any other house down there. For some reason, it reminds me of the old Colonial Hotel (now renamed something else, I believe) in Cape May, NJ.
Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at October 22, 2009 3:11 PM
I love how folks consider victorian flatbush a shabby second banana to park slope.
The running joke in the neighborhood is that every new family that moves there moves FROM park slope.
Someone's going to buy this house for $1.5 million, put $200,000 into it and live like nyc royalty.
Posted by: guywithahouse at October 22, 2009 3:13 PM
The total lack of drama and detail to the rooms is such a letdown and mismatch after seeing the dramatic and unique exterior and staircase. Those are seriously the only two details worth saving. If you don't like a closed-off parlor then knock down walls. Do a modern, open layout and just keep that amazing staircase.
Posted by: traditionalmod at October 22, 2009 3:25 PM
I agree with those who said the house has nice curb appeal and a great staircase. I also agree with those who said you have to look beyond the owner's furnishings. If you ignore the Leave It To Beaver bedrooms and dining room, there appear to be nice fireplaces, and nice built-in cabinets with glass doors. Staging would've helped. Clearly has to be seen in person. Floorplan can always be opened up a bit. But the asking price is still way too high.
Posted by: CarrollGardened at October 22, 2009 3:40 PM
I haven't read the comments thus far...so it's probably not fair for me to post my own...but, frankly, cleaning 55 windows sounds like a nightmare. Fifty-five windows?! Can you imagine if they're still single glazing? The cost to replace them...and to do it properly??? The heat you lose through all that glass???
Anyway, the price is too high. The interior needs a lot of updating and the house is not that special in my opinion. Goodness gracious...hhh...yes it's nice, but it needs a bit of an overhaul to make it really nice. And for "that money"...?
Oh, just took a second look the above photo. It looks like ugly-ish replacement windows were installed in the house's facade. I'm sure the house had 6-over-6 windows when it was built since it's Colonial Revival.
And, having glanced at some of the above comments: the people moving from Park Slope (and yes, there are a lot), seem to me to be renters who cannot afford to buy a brownstone/rowhouse in Park Slope so they look farther afield. For the asking price on this house, you might be able to settle in Park Slope and be decently "situated" (as my grandfather used to say).
Posted by: BrooklynGreene at October 22, 2009 3:47 PM
That's the thing though, I don't even like the fireplace. Boring, even ugly, and again, weirdly non-special and non-dramatic for what I would expect seeing the exterior and the staircase. It can be lost without being a loss to the house.
Posted by: traditionalmod at October 22, 2009 3:48 PM
Again, Traditionalmod, I think there is more drama in this house than meets the eye in these photos. Take the bedroom, for example. You get a hint of the oval stained glass panels in the windows, but you need to actually see it in person order to appreciate the dramatic appeal. Same with the bathroom off the master bedroom -- it's a gorgeous, detailed space. The woodwork, lots of it, and although painted, is also detailed throughout. The uppermost floor has that wonderful little terrace off the front of the house. And the curves of the rooms that play to the curved staircase are special. While it's true this house may just not be for everyone, I think most lovers of old houses will find lots to like in this one. Damn! I feel like I'm working for Mary Kay or something! Can't wait to cop on my portion of the commmission when this one sells higher than where the Bstoner pricing widget is likely to land. LOL!
Posted by: Brooklynista at October 22, 2009 3:54 PM
I agree, the fireplace is kind of ugly.
Posted by: BrooklynGreene at October 22, 2009 3:57 PM
> every new family that moves there moves FROM park slope.
They're called POOPS (Priced Out Of Park Slope).
Posted by: DitmasSnark at October 22, 2009 4:08 PM
There are active crack houses on either side and a Crips community center (i.e., shooting range and whore house) across the street. Stay in Park Slope!
Posted by: tybur6 at October 22, 2009 4:13 PM
such a silly thread. and to the person who does not believe that property taxes in the tony burbs run 25 to 30 thousand a years for a house like this: You should get out more because that's the way it is in 2009.
Posted by: Minard Lafever at October 22, 2009 4:20 PM
Is that stairwell tall enough to have one of those perpetual motion pendulums that they have at science museums? Ya know, with sand at the bottom and it draws a nifty pattern....
Posted by: tybur6 at October 22, 2009 4:24 PM
They're called POOPS (Priced Out Of Park Slope).
Posted by: DitmasSnark at October 22, 2009 4:08 PM
Snark,
would like to request rights to use that term.
Posted by: more4less at October 22, 2009 4:24 PM
I am not sure what you mean by tony suburbs but there's no point in comparing larchmont with flatbush. In the suburbs I mentioned such a house with little land and no recent renovations will not run more than 15K property taxes.
"Someone's going to buy this house for $1.5 million, put $200,000 into it and live like nyc royalty."
More like flatbush royalty. But the staircase will give them a hint how NYC royalty might live like. And they should not pay more than $600K
Posted by: bklplebe at October 22, 2009 4:30 PM
PPS definitely the most primo area of Victorian Flatbush from the time it was constructed so a premium to the rest of the area is warranted.
Having said that, this was a pre-crash sale at $1.8m (I think).
http://www.marykayg.com/html/0447.html
I know which one I would rather have for that price so I'll say 1.3-1.4 for this one.
Posted by: the chicken at October 22, 2009 4:31 PM
> would like to request rights to use that term.
Please feel free to spread POOPS far and wide.
Posted by: DitmasSnark at October 22, 2009 4:33 PM
I saw this on the house tour and really liked the feel of the interior. Not the decorating, but the elements of the house. The fireplace is quite nice, once you clear away the nick-knacks, grow some imagination people! Also re the fireplace you should be thinking turn-of-the-century aesthetic, not the more ornate style of many brownstones (marble surround and mantle). Brick was seen as a solid, authentic, practical fireplace surround material, something from colonial times. The lamp hanging in the stairway was very impressive when I was there.
Posted by: BHS at October 22, 2009 4:38 PM
- They're called POOPS (Priced Out Of Park Slope).
Snark, that's hysterical!!
Hope you don't mind, I spread it on the OT.
Posted by: brownjokester at October 22, 2009 4:41 PM
> Hope you don't mind, I spread it on the OT.
Feel free, brownjokester. Everybody POOPS!
Posted by: DitmasSnark at October 22, 2009 4:58 PM
So if you're priced out of Riverdale, you're "POOR"?
Posted by: BrooklynGreene at October 22, 2009 5:04 PM
It's called a Foucault Pendulum & it probably would work here.
Posted by: Arkady at October 22, 2009 5:04 PM
Thanks Snark.
- Everybody POOPS!
And it seems like they're spreading their mist to Flatbush.
Posted by: brownjokester at October 22, 2009 5:05 PM
oooops, I mean Prospect Park South.
;-)
Posted by: brownjokester at October 22, 2009 5:05 PM
In the appraisal done for my refi, one of the comps was 209 Rugby which sold for $900k on 7/1/2009. It's a crappy little 2 story not nearly as nice or big as this house. A prospective buyer is going to get stuck with this comp on the same block, and 177 it won't appraise anywhere near ask. Presumably buyer will make a huge down payment so may not matter. Probably not at POOPS renter, but someone with some money who sells to buy here because they want space, light, trees, ... Oh, wait - you'd be crazy to come out here. Much too dangerous on top of being absurdly overpriced. Stay in Park Slope, please.
Posted by: Bklnite at October 22, 2009 5:08 PM
"This is one of those houses that could benefit from some staging. It looks way fuddy-duddier than it has to and I feel like that is a sales killer. If it was photographed empty or at least massively stripped of the owners belongings (super minimalist) the space would show a lot better. Its a pretty sweet house." (wadser)
Totally agree. People right here on this thread are misreading this house. The staircase is the only detail worth saving? There's nice detail all over the place. The fireplace is ugly? Well, even if you don't like it, you can't say it's lacking in detail. And . . . I think without all the clutter and bad furniture AND with professional lighting and photography, it'd be hard to find it "ugly."
Posted by: Nomi at October 22, 2009 9:55 PM
oops, wasder
Posted by: Nomi at October 22, 2009 9:57 PM
They are not going to remove the shag rugs because most of the parquet floors on the ground level have been destroyed by the previous owner, a doctor who used part of the house as an office and laid down vinyl or something over the wood. This is a big negative in my book, along with the missing front porch, which the previous owner also removed. There are photos of this house with the porch, so if the price were to come down a bit, a new owner could restore it.
On the up side - the space in this house, particularly on the 2nd and 3rd floors, is fabulous. Maybe someone has already mentioned the fabulous stained glass oculus (Tiffany?) at the top of that jaw-dropping staircase? Or the massive Byantine influenced period light fixture in the foyer?
House is overpriced considering floors are shot, kitchen is starting to date, porch is missing... Price needs to take these issues into consideration, along with current market value. I would price along the lines of the Ebbinger bakery (most recent price), $1.5-$1.6. This house, however, has a better location, more square footage, and is extremely BRIGHT inside.
Posted by: Architerrorist at October 23, 2009 8:59 AM
Actually, BHS, I love craftsman era fireplaces and built-in surrounds. It's exactly why I call this one ugly! Because I've seen many many that are far better.
Posted by: traditionalmod at October 23, 2009 8:59 AM
Traditionalmod, I've been in this house, and it is a lovely house, although if you like craftsman aesthetic, not for you. I am a big fan of the arts and crafts movement, but I can also appreciate the original details of this house, many of which survive on the 2nd and 3rd floor (and the foyer). The house suffered at the hands of the previous owner. He subdivided rooms, destroyed the ground floor parquet, etc... The mechanicals on this house are excellent, which is worth considering. So much of the renovation budget is frequently spent behind the walls of these homes.
Posted by: Architerrorist at October 23, 2009 9:06 AM
bklnite: i don't understand your logic. if 209 rugby is smaller and less desirable wouldn't this house appraise for much, much more? it must be twice the size.
btw: does anybody know what the deal was with 209--it never really entered the market. it just showed up as sold on mary kay gallagher's website (too bad--i would have liked to bid on that one--i think it's cute as a button.)
the owner of 177 said it's fabulous on the inside, but needed a fair amount of work.
Posted by: manofelt at October 23, 2009 9:28 AM
Mary Kay has people on her list who "wait" for certain houses. If the seller agrees, I'm assuming, they just make a quick sale. It is a lovely house - small for PPS standards - but dripping in charm. It was built on property originally belonging to neighborhing blue house on the corner of Rugby and Beverley,sold off during the Depression. There's a lot to be said for owning a smaller home, dripping in charm, in a fantastic neighborhood.
I think the asking price seems high for that house because there are no real comps for it, save one other 30s era house on the same block, a few houses up towards Albemarle.
Mary Kay sometimes has a message at the top of her listings page which says "call for other listings." These tend to be prime listings where the owners know they can make a quick sell at ask and don't actually want the exposure.
Posted by: Architerrorist at October 23, 2009 9:41 AM
Smaller houses in DP, PPS (well tended and retaining original detail) tend to go for more per square foot than the larger homes... They are hard to come by and far easier to maintain.
Posted by: Architerrorist at October 23, 2009 9:43 AM
Architerrorist--very interesting on the missing porch. I thought the front looked very naked in person. And front porches were so popular in that era (as one can see from the rest of the nabe) so I'd definitely wondered if it'd had one removed.
Posted by: BHS at October 23, 2009 12:59 PM
It was a front porch that wrapped around the right side of the house. If I was photographing that staircase, I would have shot upwards - the stained glass oculus at the top of the stair case is breathtaking.
Posted by: Architerrorist at October 23, 2009 8:00 PM

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