Forum
« Cheap/free "extra" floor tile? Does this house have any hope? »
March 23, 2008
The Sunday NY Times *kinda* gets Clinton Hill--and kinda doesn't get it, at all...
Did you see the Sunday Times Real-Estate section piece on Clinton Hill? Not bad. Not great. Check it out:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/realestate/23livi.html?_r=1&ref=realestate&oref=slogin
I appreciate the writer’s admiration for the architecture. And he tried, I think, to paint an accurate picture of Clinton Hill. But he missed the point on several of the most important fronts. (Which is fine—the last thing we want is a huge influx of hedge-funders…)
The two main things I think he missed is the extent of the huge investment being made in these old houses, and the gravity of the improvement of Myrtle Avenue. There’s a dumpster on every block; new façades, new floors, new roofs, new complete renovations, new conversions everywhere on the Hill’s residential blocks. On Myrtle, yes, he notes that the vacancy rate has dropped from 20% to 8%, and leaves it at that. What he completely neglects to mention is the quality of the retail tenants; the street formerly known here as Murder Avenue has in just the last two years seen several beautiful new restaurants arrive, the area’s third wine shop, sharp boutiques, charming watering holes, new banks, glassy lofts, the new Pratt art-supply store—it’s nothing short of booming. He also seems not to notice that the lovely, bustling restaurant row on Dekalb in Ft. Greene is very much a part of the life of a Hill resident; a few minutes’ walk for me.
The writer seemed Manhattan-centric, a visitor who took a couple of strolls around the neighborhood and seemed to mainly view it through the perspective of one newbie resident family that appears to long for Park Slope.
One thing he got mostly right is that there aren’t good enough grocery stores here. However, it depends where you live. The family he cited bought on Lefferts Place, which is in the far Southern part of the Hill, and, indeed, is nowhere near a good grocery. But my house, in the Northern part, is one block away from an Associated on Myrtle that is fine for staples, has a great beer selection, and a growing organic selection (but a weak produce department, and an unacceptable meat department). Then again, as all of us in Clinton Hill know, we really are part and parcel of Ft. Greene, both neighborhoods being, actually, tiny and interconnected, and fancier groceries are freshly available at the brand-new gourmet shop Greene Grape Provisions, right next to the Lafayette stop on the C line—the train that everybody I know here uses to get into and out of Manhattan. Provisions sells everything from fresh oysters to artisanal cheeses and rack of lamb—and it’s a 10-minute walk for us.
He also has the prices wrong. There has not yet been a single 4-story brownstone that has even broken the $2 million barrier in Clinton Hill. The Pfizer mansion, which is a big, wide, 5-story joint, sold for more than $3 million, but that’s an unusual property.
Finally, what he really failed to grasp about the specialness of this place is the fabulous, friendly, bohemian mix of people here. This is a blend of workers, writers, students, artists, professors, bankers, tradesmen, lawyers, every imaginable race and income. This great mix owes its biggest debt to the stabilizing influence of Pratt Institute, god bless the place. While I think all of Clinton Hill is proud of its legacy as a bulwark of the black middle class homeowner, it is hardly a monolithic, 80-percent “minority”neighborhood reflected by the obsolete census data of 8 years ago. Fascinatingly, it also has a peculiarly large French population, which has brought many of our lovely little eateries. Much has changed in that mix over the last few years—more affluent whites, yes, but fortunately not *too * many more of them. It is a very healthy mix, something you’ll see when the 2010 census is parsed.
Comments
Seems that the writer took a short stroll through Clinton Hill then writes a piece that is totally off the mark! TOTALLY!!!! Its unfortunate because Clinton Hill is fantastic!
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 11:26 AM
It's an "if you're thinking of living in..." piece. The style is in keeping with the series. The omissions you point to are not fitting with the series.
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 1:09 PM
Guest 1:09, you're wrong. In just one example: the article says 4-story brownstones run S1- to 3 million. No 4-story brownstone has ever even broken the $2 million barrier in CH. "If you're thinking of living in" Clinton Hill, that, obviously, would be relevant.
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 1:27 PM
There are currently two listings on corcoran's web site for over 2 million dollars for clinton hill.
I think "if you're thinking of living in" clinton hill current asking prices are more relevant than historical sales prices.
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 1:36 PM
1:27, what makes you the authority on housing prices in CH?
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 1:38 PM
Gregory Beyer, is that you?
Yeah, fine, great, 1:36--you can ASK whatever you want. There was a $3.5 million listing at 275 Washington for six months, and now it's off the market, unsold. Whatever: there has not yet been a 4-story brownstone that broke the $2 million barrier here. Even if one sells for $2.95 tomorrow--and I hope one does, since I own a 4-story brownstone, here--that still isn't $3 million.
Ergo, the story was wrong.
They're called comparable sales, folks. That's how you gauge the value of property. In a word: duh.
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 1:44 PM
How could the times have made such an error. Mr duh is perfect and the times is wrong.
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 1:49 PM
NYC.gov lists one home sold in 2007 for over $2MM and another for over $3MM. I guess Mr Duh is all wet?
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 1:55 PM
And guest 1:49 is either 12 years old or mentally retarded.
Or a Brooklyn real-estate broker. ;)
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 1:56 PM
Um, idiot 1:55: those were not 4-story brownstones. They were, respectively, 275 Washington and the Pfizer manse, which are, respectively, 12,000 sf and about 9000 sf. A 4-story brownstone is about 3600.
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 1:58 PM
Love the discourse here. Love it. Happy Easter, one and all.
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 4:12 PM
I don't come to Brownstoner to talk about Easter--I'm talking real estate, here. Find yourself an Easter blog, if that's your trip.
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 5:27 PM
But whether you are talking about real estate or anything else, you can still be civil. Come on, sure you can. There you go...
And if you are going to insist on being rude, at least sign in as more than "guest" so we can keep track of you.
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at March 23, 2008 5:42 PM
I agree on the civility, completely.
It is a little difficult for some folks, I'm sure, when you get silly trolls coming on here and telling you that comps aren't the way to suss out property values.....
Posted by: Rehab at March 23, 2008 6:20 PM
103 Greene Avenue (Clinton Hill) - last sale = $2.1 million.
Posted by: guest at March 23, 2008 7:08 PM
I thought it was an excellent article and presented the neighborhood's strengths and weaknesses fairly.
Posted by: guest at March 24, 2008 10:07 AM
I have lived in Brooklyn (PH) for 25 years and they have never gotten Brooklyn's Brownstone neighborhoods right. Don't worry, we all live here and know what's good and what's bad. The Times support of AY was the final icing on the cake of how little they get Brooklyn - I respect the paper for doing somethings right but they will never give a fair assessment of where I live.
Posted by: guest at March 24, 2008 12:06 PM
Actually, at the southern end of Clinton Hill, there is Met Foods on Fulton for staples, and the new Green Planet organic shop/grocery on Fulton as well, so to say there are no grocery options near Lefferts Place is not correct (though I definitely think more are needed). Also, 7.08 is correct about that Greene Avenue brownstone at $2.1 - sold last August.
Still, it was not a very well researched article. One thing I've noticed in the past 6 or so years in the area is how much more affluent the residents seem generally (the newer residents that is who are buying all the houses). You really notice it during peak rush hour on the subways (C train in my experience).
Posted by: guest at March 25, 2008 11:59 AM
yeah, well, the NY Times doesn't have its neighborhood boundaries right, since the picture is Layfayette Avenue, between Adelphi and Clermont, which is Fort Greene, not Clinton Hill. They ARE right about food though. Clinton Hill/Fort Greene distinguishes itself as having pathetic (beyond pathetic) retail services for groceries. I'm waiting, but till then, it's a weekly drive to Fairway.
Posted by: donatella at March 26, 2008 1:34 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.