« Walkabout: Italianates, the Ornamental Imperative Inside Third & Bond: Week 107 »

November 5, 2009

Brooklyn Sales: Under a Million

sales%20under%20a%20mil%2011-05-2009.jpg
Some of the sales recorded last week that went for $1 million or less:

$250K or under: CLINTON HILL
195 Willoughby Avenue, #109; Price=$165,000 GMAP
The listing for this co-op said it's a 450-sf, 1st floor studio. It was asking $199,000. Maintenance=$335/month. Closed on 10/27/09; deed recorded on 10/29/09.

$250-$500K Range: COBBLE HILL
200 Congress Street, #5C; Price=$475,000 GMAP
This 725-sf, 1-bedroom co-op was listed for $499,000 in June. Maintenance=$678/month. Closed on 10/14/09; deed recorded on 10/29/09.

$500-$750K Range: SOUTH SLOPE
421 17th Street; Price=$700,000 GMAP
This 972-sf house was listed for $799,000 in late May, according to StreetEasy. Property Shark says it last sold for $450,000 in '04. Entered into contract on 8/13/09; closed on 9/1/09; deed recorded on 10/30/09.

$750K-$1 Million Range: SUNSET PARK
551 57th Street; Price=$780,000 GMAP
This is a 3,072-sf, 2-family, according to Property Shark. Entered into contract on 7/24/09; closed on 10/9/09; deed recorded on 10/26/09.

Photos from Property Shark.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/12136

Comments

that slope house is the sweetest thing ever.

Posted by: gkw at November 5, 2009 11:06 AM

thank you Stoner!

Behold exhibit (a) Slummy brick house in PS for over 420K.

what a hot mess compared to that townhouse from yesterday

Posted by: jack slade at November 5, 2009 11:08 AM

HAHAH
we actually were going to buy that South Slope House in 2003 when the lady selling it was asking $450K, we had an engineer come and my contractor friend both of which told us to RUN RUN fast. We tried negotiating the price down due to all the problems, but alas she wouldn't come down for us
clearly she found a sucker - b/c they had to at least put $150-200K in structural AND gut renovations so the new sellers obvioulsly didn't make that much of a profit if they had to sell it at 700K
I feel bad for them

Posted by: gemini10 at November 5, 2009 11:28 AM

Those buildings in Cobble Hill and Clinton Hill are very warm and inviting.

Posted by: tybur6 at November 5, 2009 11:30 AM

That Cobble Hill Coop looks like it's in the projects.

Posted by: Joe from Brooklyn at November 5, 2009 11:37 AM

South Slope shitbox for 700K. Great value!

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at November 5, 2009 11:40 AM

Joe,
That's what 1/2 million dollars + $700/month gets you. A 1-bedroom apartment in the projects! Awesome, right?

Posted by: tybur6 at November 5, 2009 11:46 AM

(OK - projects-style building)

Posted by: tybur6 at November 5, 2009 11:47 AM

there you go again, bho.
can't find the data to support your thesis, so insult the stupid buyers.
brilliant, unassailable logic.
sunset park looks like a strong price, too.

Posted by: antidope at November 5, 2009 11:51 AM

The Cobble Hill co-op is actually a really nice, well-maintained building with a very nice lawn and landscaping, and the location is great - right across from Cobble Hill Park.

Posted by: CarrollGardened at November 5, 2009 11:52 AM

Seems there are more and more posters from Indiana on this website.

Posted by: DeLepp at November 5, 2009 11:57 AM

That south slope house must be a development site. No one would pay that much for that hovel, especially in that god awful location.

Posted by: Polemicist at November 5, 2009 12:01 PM

so what would a 2 bedroom with balcony/view cost on Willoughby? 400k?

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 5, 2009 12:05 PM

No... CarrollGardened. It's not a "really nice building" -- the rest you say I'm sure is true. Well-maintained, nice lawn and great location.

As far as a building is concerned, it's a crap building that fulfills all of the requirements of being low-income/welfare housing. It just happens to sell its units for $1/2 million instead -- that's the difference.

Posted by: tybur6 at November 5, 2009 12:05 PM

Pole, that is actually a nice block. And it's a very cute house. THe only thing, it and the one next to it look like the facade is falling down.

Posted by: denton at November 5, 2009 12:10 PM

I like the block that South Slope house is on. And I like the block. (ok, so yeah, this is my neighborhood). If I had the money, I would have bought it. Looks to be the perfect size for me and two cats.

Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at November 5, 2009 12:24 PM

"As far as a building is concerned, it's a crap building that fulfills all of the requirements of being low-income/welfare housing. It just happens to sell its units for $1/2 million instead -- that's the difference."--
ok - it has brick exterior and boxshaped. SO?
Like lots of other bldgs of that period...from low income to high income. What makes it 'crap'...?
Even the 'projects'? how are they crap? have you ever been in them? Smaller rooms usually (from ones I've seen), public spaces more utilitarian or drab if you prefer. Same with kitchens and baths....And in this congress st bldg I don't think the kitchen and bath were so generic or low-income.

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 5, 2009 12:25 PM

Ooops! should have said "And I like the house."

Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at November 5, 2009 12:29 PM

That's actually my point Pete. It's aesthetically terrible. It's a soviet-style apartment block. It's utilitarian and drab.

The projects are "crap" in the sense of low quality... the fact that they stand the test of time, neglected with almost no maintenance by the gov't after they are built, well, that proves that they are well-built.

I dunno. Maybe I'm putting too much on the aesthetics... but to pay $1/2 million for a seriously utilitarian building seems crazy to me. (Though, it seems to have other things going for it -- mostly the location... errr... and the lawn?)

Is it well-maintained? Probably. Are your neighbors nice? Hope so. Is the building a crappy maximization of space with nothing but pure 'function' figuring into the design? Absolutely.

Posted by: tybur6 at November 5, 2009 12:32 PM

The lintel over the South Slope house doorway is not properly aligned. Sloppy.

Posted by: East New York at November 5, 2009 12:33 PM

tybur, I stand by my original assessment, and agree with Pete. The layouts don't work for me personally - at least none of the available units I've seen. But, it's an affordable building [ducking for cover now] for many people who might otherwise be completely priced out of Cobble Hill.

Posted by: CarrollGardened at November 5, 2009 12:33 PM

Such disdain for public housing. There are some very architecturally distinguished housing projects in NYC, which lead the way in creating solid, healthful housing for the underpriviled. No need to be so snooty about "public housing being crap" that's just know-nothing talk.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at November 5, 2009 12:35 PM

Cute widdle house in South Slope with crooked lintel sells for $700K. Thus, the "recession" was either (a) very overrated, (b) very over, or (c) passed over us like the angel of death over every crooked lintel upon which was painted the blood of the lamb.

Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at November 5, 2009 12:37 PM

Shocker - sounds like no one on Brownstoner (sans Rob) has actually BEEN inside an apartment in the projects. They are BIG, good floorplans and very sunny. Built pretty solid as well (you won't hear your upstairs neighbor's kids running around)

So the best of both worlds would be a building LIKE the projects, but doesn't have hallways that smell like piss. I would imagine the CH Co-ops fit into that category.

Posted by: dirty_hipster at November 5, 2009 12:38 PM

"there you go again, bho.
can't find the data to support your thesis, so insult the stupid buyers.
brilliant, unassailable logic."

I found that Case-Shiller and all other broker market reports have brownstones hovering around -20% from peak. That supports the early to mid stages of my thesis. Gotta pass through -20% to get to -50%. Keep snappin' pictures, 'dope. Say "cheese", market!

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at November 5, 2009 12:43 PM

You nailed it, Brenda (the rhetorical point, not the crooked lintel). Funny how the people who keep saying the brownstone Brooklyn housing market is in free fall also keep expressing shock at how much everyone keeps paying for houses. Opinion seems to matter so much more than data points. 2+2 =??

Posted by: slopefarm at November 5, 2009 12:45 PM

tybur, I wasn't referring to the aesthetics of the building's exterior facade - the brick is indeed nothing special - but if I'm looking to buy an apartment, I'm not planning to hang off the side of the building; I'm far more interested with location and space. Were I to buy another Brownstone, I'd care far more about the facade. When I said it's a "really nice" building, I was referring to the complete package - apartments with decent layouts and finishes, nice neighbors (I've met a lot of people who live there), great location, well-maintained, nice grounds. And, yes, there is a lawn surrounding the building, which, along with the landscaping, is meticulously maintained. (I don't live there, btw, but walk my dog past the building multiple times a day en route to Cobble Hill Park.)

Posted by: CarrollGardened at November 5, 2009 12:47 PM

Minard -- I don't have a particular disdain for public housing. Just the buildings. You are right *SOME* are architecturally distinguished buildings. However, most look like this Cobble Hill building... which looks like the Gowanus Houses down the road a bit. Just crap.

And if it wasn't clear... my above comment should read:

"The projects areN'T "crap" in the sense of low quality... the fact that they stand the test of time"

Posted by: tybur6 at November 5, 2009 12:48 PM

Or, Brenda, (d) one of the last FHA/$8K credit grabs.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at November 5, 2009 12:49 PM

I've been in many public housing complexes and apartments, including some belonging to relatives, and what DH says is true. The apartments tend to be large and some even have spectacular views due to their height. Most of the walls and floors are stone, so as DH says they're also built quite well in many respects.

There are also some (relatively) well-maintained and -run housing project complexes. The Linden Houses in Brooklyn and the Harlem River Houses are good examples.

Posted by: East New York at November 5, 2009 12:50 PM

And I guess my point is really... It's a shame these ugly ass buildings were built in the first place AND being able to sell a unit for $1/2 million basically sends the message to developers that this is perfectly acceptable. Build as utilitarian and ugly of a building as possible, but don't worry because they will sell.

Posted by: tybur6 at November 5, 2009 12:51 PM

I'll take a post-war building any day. While pre-war-o-philes may ooh and aah over a built-in shelf, an arched entryway or a bit of crown molding, I'm luxuriating in a large and airy space with a 20 foot expanse of windows and a gazillion closets. And the walls and floors and solid and thick, keeping noise from neighbors to a minimum

Is it bland looking on the exterior? Sure. Do I care? Not, not a whole heckuva lot.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at November 5, 2009 1:00 PM

Tybur - i think the developers are doing the exact opposite nowadays.

instead of building utilitarian and solid they are building faux flashy and on the cheap. Not every building can look like The Dakota

Prices on the other hand - That's the market, not the developers fault (CH Co-op was a resale)

Posted by: dirty_hipster at November 5, 2009 1:01 PM

Posted by: Minard Lafever at November 5, 2009 12:35 PM

Yeah, when I was growing up I was SOOOO jealous of all my friends that lived in the Sheepshead projects. I mean, I NEVER got to hear gunshots and see crack being sold like they did. Lucky...

Posted by: Joe from Brooklyn at November 5, 2009 1:36 PM

So this co-op in the center of cobble hill reminds you of your horrific childhood in Sheepshead bay? that's sad in a way.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at November 5, 2009 1:39 PM

So this co-op in the center of cobble hill reminds you of your horrific childhood in Sheepshead bay? that's sad in a way.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at November 5, 2009 1:39 PM

Read the post properly before commenting please...

I will not let twits pull me into senseless back and forth arguments ,I will not let twits pull me into senseless back and forth arguments...

Posted by: Joe from Brooklyn at November 5, 2009 1:47 PM

CobbleHill bldg also has indoor garage. Probably waiting list for a space though.

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 5, 2009 1:53 PM

joe, calm down. Your Sheepshead days are past -I think.
Remember, Montrosse is the good dead architect, I'm the bad dead architect. Booo!

Posted by: Minard Lafever at November 5, 2009 2:09 PM

This Cobble Hill building has been discussed on this site before.

It was a very cool building until its appearance was destroyed by replacement windows. If you round the corner, you see the stairwell windows are still the black iron, multi-paned windows. Very modern.

It is very nicely situated in one of the most picturesque parts of the neighborhood and is across the street from a park and the mews. It is by no means "the projects," it just looks that way in photos.

Posted by: mopar at November 5, 2009 7:23 PM

does anyone know if this was a Project in the past and it's now converted to a coop?

Posted by: jack slade at November 5, 2009 7:33 PM

no. it's just an ugly building from 1961. Ornament was crime in those days. Old brownstone houses were thought to be white elephants waiting for the boneyard. It is all part of the flow of history.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at November 5, 2009 7:50 PM

That 2800 sq. ft brick house in bed stuy from yesterday is looking like a steal compared to these places!

Posted by: dubstey at November 5, 2009 10:26 PM

« Walkabout: Italianates, the Ornamental Imperative Inside Third & Bond: Week 107 »

November 5, 2009

Brooklyn Sales: Under a Million

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions