« Open House Picks: Six Months Later Streetlevel: Orchid Cafe in Bed-Stuy »

October 9, 2009

Open House Picks

housePark Slope
376 11th Street
Corcoran
Sunday 12-1:30
$1,650,000
GMAP P*Shark

housePark Slope
178A 13th Street
Warren Lewis
Sunday 12:30-1:30
$1,075,000
GMAP P*Shark

houseKensington
289 East 7th Street
Brooklyn Properties
Sunday 2-4
$799,000
GMAP P*Shark


houseFlatbush
691 East 22nd Street
TJ Mill
Sunday 1-4
$699,000
GMAP P*Shark




Posted by Brownstoner at 1:04 PM | Comments (47)
Categories: Open Houses

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/11790

Comments

The South Slope house seems attractive for the price.

Posted by: mopar at October 9, 2009 1:09 PM

Which one? I like the 11th St. one better. 600k difference! How could that be?

Posted by: infinitejester at October 9, 2009 1:11 PM

178 A is a 1,075 sq. ft duplex condo unit...$785 psf with that fugly drop ceiling in the bedroom

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 9, 2009 1:14 PM

Sorry, 1,400 sq ft

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 9, 2009 1:16 PM

ij. you jest.
in case you haven't heard, location is important in real estate matters...

Posted by: antidope at October 9, 2009 1:19 PM

LOL,,,there IS actually a big difference between a house between 5th & 6th and one between 3rd & 4th.

That's why I bought one on Stuyvesant Ave in Stuyvesant heighs for $800k and not one a mile west in Ft Greene or CH for $1.5 MM on some shitty block

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 9, 2009 1:26 PM

13th Street is the whole house, DIBS, not just the duplex. Ad touts the rental and the floor plan. Of course, as we all commented mroe than a year ago, 13th west of 4th is Gowanus Shores, or DUGO (Down Under Gowanus Overpass), not Park Slope.

Posted by: slopefarm at October 9, 2009 1:29 PM

antidope, the listings say 11th and 5th, and 13th and 7th.

Posted by: infinitejester at October 9, 2009 1:29 PM

never mind, I have it backwards

Posted by: infinitejester at October 9, 2009 1:36 PM

not.
it does say Park Slope though and that is flat out wrong, imo.

Posted by: antidope at October 9, 2009 1:36 PM

Drop ceilings hurt my feelings. How hard/expensive is it to remedy that?

Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at October 9, 2009 1:39 PM

ISNH- lifetime therapy to fix your hurt feelings can be quite pricy.

Posted by: antidope at October 9, 2009 1:42 PM

snappy, it ain't the dropped ceiling that's hard to remedy. It's what lies underneath...

Posted by: denton at October 9, 2009 1:43 PM

Antidope, Ha!

What's usually underneath a drop ceiling? (or above it I should say)

Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at October 9, 2009 1:45 PM

Boxes of old pizza, grand pianos, cobras....hard to say until you open it up.

Posted by: mopar at October 9, 2009 1:52 PM

Anyone have any insight about the Flatbush house? Is that a good price? Is it really 'priced to sell'?

Posted by: brownjokester at October 9, 2009 1:52 PM

Over a mil to live far south between 3rd and 4th avenues is a stretch. Nice looking property on the surface, but c'mon. That area is grim.

It is NOT park slope, it's Gowanus.

Nice looking place on 11th, tastefully done...but $1.65Mil for a single-family on this block, nice enough as it is, seems a bit optimistic. Hardly outrageous given it's peers, but I doubt anyone's running in to pony up the cash.

What is nice is all these new optimistic sellers are flooding the area with inventory.

Posted by: MoneyForNothing at October 9, 2009 2:06 PM

the 11th Street house has two bedrooms.
A two-bedroom house, in the South Slope. for 1.6 million.
Rock like it's 2007!!

Posted by: Minard Lafever at October 9, 2009 2:06 PM

Minard,
you know better than that... really doesn't make much difference how many bedrooms the space is divided into.
What matter is that they are asking $763 a sq ft. If they divided the same 2160 sq ft into 6 bedrooms does not make it a bargain.

Posted by: Petebklyn at October 9, 2009 2:55 PM

pete, I disagree. When you are buying raw commercial space the sq ft cost is what is most important. But when a family buys a house it's the number of bedrooms. -Or were you being facetious?
Also I don't see how that house has 2160 sq ft. That's about 300 sq.ft. more than I get from the floorplans.


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

the 2160 I'm taking from propshark. And not everyone buying is a 'family' especially smaller houses like this. probably not having kids puts you in better financial position to buy :)

Posted by: Petebklyn at October 9, 2009 3:11 PM

still expensive. I'll wait. I've got more than enough sq ft and monthlies are dirt cheap - no urgency to rush in. I like my chances in this waiting game plus I'm not that particular in getting a special fancy house, etc

Posted by: more4less at October 9, 2009 3:11 PM

how about a sub-million open house picks?

Posted by: more4less at October 9, 2009 3:26 PM

"Anyone have any insight about the Flatbush house? Is that a good price? Is it really 'priced to sell'?

Posted by: brownjokester at October 9, 2009 1:52 PM"


BJ, it's hard to tell without any more interior shots. Google streetview shows the limited kerb appeal - it's definitely the least well kept house on the block (and not a fan of that chainlink fencing).

Having said that, if the bones are good and the kitchen and bathrooms don't need much doing to them then it could be a good deal. Good condition places in the area having been selling with an 8 handle and a "motivated seller" should be willing to negotiate.

Posted by: the chicken at October 9, 2009 3:35 PM

M4L, are you looking to buy to live in now? Or are you still looking for investment places?

Posted by: the chicken at October 9, 2009 3:36 PM

Yes, the 11th Street house has 2 bedrooms and a closet they are claiming is 3rd bedroom (it's less than 6 feet wide).

I saw this house, and the other problem IMO is that the owners have very lovely taste, so it shows well, but if you look closer, you see that the house itself is not as beautiful as their personal effects make it appear. The kitchen cabinetry for example, is pretty low quality, as are closet doors, etc. Bathroom finishes are pretty home-depot-ish.

Also, the block is one of the less attractive ones in the slope.

All that said, I would be happy with this house at a lower price point but I think they are simply asking too much.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at October 9, 2009 3:39 PM

"What's usually underneath a drop ceiling? (or above it I should say) "

Snappy, usually a plaster ceiling thru which there has been weeks or years of leakage, and it is falling down. Rather then fix it, they put in a dropped ceiling.

Posted by: denton at October 9, 2009 3:42 PM

In terms of square foot costs, an 1800 sq ft loft or apartment has way more usable space than an 1800 square foot brownstone with two entrances and three different levels. You could fit four bedrooms easily in an 1800 sq. ft. loft and still have lots of room left over for common spaces.

I'm talking real square feet not realtor square feet.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at October 9, 2009 3:43 PM

On the 11th Street house--that 16 foot wide deck is nearly the width of the entire house. Is that legal? (I thought I recalled the code requiring two-thirds or less the width of the house.) If it's not legal, could that cause any hitches in the sale of the house, getting a mortgage, etc.?

Posted by: basementalist at October 9, 2009 3:54 PM

chicken, place to live but I shop like I'm buying an investmt ppty - ie prices & cash flows have to make sense else joy of ownership would not be there but rather a huge load to carry around

Posted by: more4less at October 9, 2009 4:01 PM

Not sure I agree with your criteria me old China.

Where I'd shop to live (Ditmas Park/Flatbush) is different to where I'd shop to invest (West Bed-Stuy, Crown Heights, PLG).

The type of housing in DP is not really that conducive to renting but lovely to live - and good price/sq ft.

Posted by: the chicken at October 9, 2009 4:10 PM

I'd love to live in Ditmas Park- so beautiful there. Feels like some of the old towns upstate. I'm glad to see you think CH is a good place to buy for investment. Give us a few more years and it'll be even better. We need more amenities- eateries, shops and such.

Posted by: bxgrl at October 9, 2009 4:19 PM

chicken, I dont have enough $$$ to buy a place to live AND another place to invest. my point was I do the same cash flow analysis on the place to live as I would do on an investmt ppty. I want to own a house and live in it comfortably cause I want house ownership to be a joy. if I cant afford it comfortably (something I would know per the cash flow calc's, etc.), I wouldn't buy it. if I can't find a place that I can afford comfortably, then I'll rent. Priority 1 is to enjoy life so there's no way I would buy something where I would worry too much about how to afford the mortgage paymts.

BTW, I intend to keep my crown heights place hence really not looking to get another investmt ppty (ie don't want to over weight too much in that asset)

Posted by: more4less at October 9, 2009 4:20 PM

The other issue with the 11th Street house is that they're advertising it as a one-family with an "auxilliary" kitchen on the ground floor, when what this undoubtedly really means is an illegal conversion from a one- to a two-family. What would it take to get a proper two-family C of O so you could rent out the ground floor apartment?

In any case, the price is wacko. There have been four-story brownstones in the center and north Slope, with actual original detail (which this house appears to lack), asking not much more than that.

Posted by: Park Sloper at October 9, 2009 4:20 PM

Actually, on reflection I think I do agree with your thinking (at least that is what I have done with the houses I have owned to date). My preference has been to buy cheaply (ie a better quality of property in an area with potential that's been within my mashflow budget) and benefit from an improving environment.

Mrs Chicken used to have my pioneering spirit but she's not up for the living through gentrification thing anymore. Quite frankly, if I had my way, I'd have already bought that house that DIBS/MM/etc were all raving about the other day.

When it comes to property, I guess I would be categorised as a "value investor".

Posted by: the chicken at October 9, 2009 4:34 PM

I was a nosy neighbor and checked out the 11th street house. It is as turn key as i've seen in the south slope. beautiful inside and great backyard. I do agree it is aggressively priced. high 1.4s, maybe low 1.5s. I'm on that block so selfishly i hope they get asking.

Posted by: leroyjenkins at October 9, 2009 4:48 PM

DAVID!
"...and not one a mile west in Ft Greene or CH for $1.5 MM on some shitty block."

Some "shitty block"? Thanks A LOT! Geesh! Look a lot of our houses in FG are from the 1840s and 1850s...they're old and need a lot of upkeep...but shitty?

Well...anyway...have a good weekend.

Posted by: BrooklynGreene at October 9, 2009 6:41 PM

I saw a surprising ad today. The Corcoran office on Bedford Ave. is advertising a new construction three family in Brownsville for $499,000. It was a short sale. Seems like an unusual location and property for them.

Posted by: mopar at October 9, 2009 10:20 PM

I only just looked at the 11th St. house. My goodness, what a beauty. It's not often that you see a place this nice. I wonder what the owners do for a living -- do they sell mid-century modern furniture? Although I see what you mean, Miss Muffet, about the furniture being even better than the finishes -- but the finishes look good. Very good. Maybe they'll include the furniture in the sale price?

Posted by: mopar at October 9, 2009 10:30 PM

Miss Muffett: re 11th Street--You say you'd be happy with this house at a lower price point. What would you be willing to pay for it, and what do you suspect it will actually go for? Just curious what the spread is currently between your sense of a reasonable price and your sense of actual market prices.

Posted by: basementalist at October 9, 2009 10:49 PM

Mopar, did you look at in person? The finishes look better in the photos than in person. Really, I was much more impressed with the owners' stuff than the finishes of the actual house - but alas, one is not buying their taste, but the underlying house, which is perfectly OK but no great beauty when you see beyond the staging. And I wish the block was nicer, but it isn't. I would probably be happy to buy this house for 1.2million (or a bit more) but I personally think the current price is much too aggressive and just not worth it. It also feels small-ish inside. Again, not a complaint at the right price point but for this price, it would be.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at October 9, 2009 11:44 PM

No, I didn't see it in person. Well, you have nothing to lose by offering $1.2 and see what they say.

Posted by: mopar at October 9, 2009 11:54 PM

Also, what's the deal with the basement? Would it actually work as a studio rental?

Posted by: mopar at October 9, 2009 11:58 PM

"but if you look closer, you see that the house itself is not as beautiful as their personal effects make it appear"

Whenever you see that at open houses it's possible the broker hired a stager. As many lazy brokers we see there are a few who will invest a decent amount of money into their listings and hire stagers and professional photographers. Or even hire a contractor to fix some things when it's a house not apt and they're confident they'll make a sale and make good money from it.

Posted by: traditionalmod at October 10, 2009 9:38 AM

The current configuration of 11th street is such that if you tried to convert garden to rental, it would be a large studio, and owners would be living in a 2BR, 1BA duplex (with a tiny den that is less than 6 feet wide - or a big a walk-in closet). The current owners bought the house, renovated, a few years ago for under 1 mil. I think they should be happy to make 1.2+.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at October 10, 2009 1:14 PM

I paid $625/sq. ft. across 11th St. in 2006, for a four-story with four bedrooms (make it $677 if you count what I have and will put into the house to restore it). Assuming the house needs nothing done to it, that would be about $1.46M in a 2006 market. In this market, I'd agree with Miss Muffett -- anything north of $1.2 should make the owners happy.

Posted by: ProfRobert at October 10, 2009 2:25 PM

There is NO way in hell 11th street should be able to get anything north of $1.2mil. By comparison, 466 5th street, in the same school zone, sold for $1.841 in jan of this year, but it is 1.8x the size of the 11th street house (3600 sq ft), so its per square foot sale price was $512.

That being said, a sucker is born every minute. Right now, a lot of the banks that took and kept TARP money (Tax payer money) are looking to pay out record bonuses. I am sure one of these bankers will be able to spend money recklessly on a house; our tax dollars. Ordinary tax paying working families continue to get stiffed and priced out of desirable neighborhoods.

Posted by: dandel at October 11, 2009 4:14 PM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions