So this is basically a 1 bedroom apartment with Garage and a 2 bed duplex.

The owner needs to decide if the value of $2.1m for each makes sense?

If the top duplex was to take the Garage for themselves then you're left with a large one bed apartment to rent out and a tenant who's going to be sleeping above your car entering and exiting the garage.

Either way the value seems high.

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 3, 2009 3:41 PM in response to House of the Day: 28 Middagh Street

The information on acris can be extremely difficult to read and decipher particularly in instances where the existing owner has refinanced etc. Our information was lifted off ACRIS and debated on several different blogs (this one included) ad nauseum when we gained a little notoriety a couple of years ago and what I found funny (after initially feeling aghast that my financial privacy had been shattered) was that not one person was able to correctly identify our actual mortgage amount but consistently had it about $600k over what it is.

As NK said years ago you physically had to go to the clerks office to access this info but now it is on the web for all to see. BKRules I don't think the AG is really going to get involved - this information has always been in the public domain and all the internet has down is make it more accessible.

Posted by: 99luftballons at September 3, 2009 3:52 PM in response to Blockshopper

If all they have done is published (and repackaged) information already in the public domain, then they are not in breach. As someone above has said in NYC all property transactions as well as mortgages are recorded on ACRIS and easily searchable by anyone.

While what they are doing might feel like an invasion of privacy all they've done is make the information easier to access. In a way this is no different than Streeteasy or PropertyShark although Blockshopper writes a 'story' as opposed to merely displaying data in its raw form.

If protection of your address was important to you then the condo purchase should have been done by an LLC you control.

It's now way too late to close this door, this horse has already bolted.

Posted by: 99luftballons at September 3, 2009 12:13 PM in response to Blockshopper

Speaking as someone who's had a lot written about whether we live in Cobble Hill or not, I feel qualified to say that this house is not in Cobble Hill. I think Brownstoner misinterpreted the RE listing where it says that "two family located steps from trendy Smith Street in Cobble Hill.".

That being said in lieu of a floor plan or better photos I think the price is a bit of a stretch. Three floors of 20 x 34 = 680 sq ft which includes hallway & staircase are not particularly big. If you assume the the staircase & associated hallway take up 180 sq ft (say 6 x 30) then you're left with 1500 sq ft spread out over three floors. How do you configure that as a decent sized one family? That's basically two decent sized and one small room per floor.

Not that we're looking but I'd pass on this one even at a million.

Posted by: 99luftballons at August 27, 2009 2:03 PM in response to House of the Day: 86 Douglass Street

R6 zoning allows commercial space 100 feet from a commercial strip. They are within that 100 feet (of Smith St) and therefore allowed to conduct business there. I haven't seen the sign so whether it's size is an issue or not I can't comment but when they were under construction and expanding the ground floor (to be used as commercial space) within 20 feet of my rear lot line I queried it on Brownstoner at the time. That's how I learned about the 100 foot zoning exemption.

Posted by: 99luftballons at June 19, 2009 10:53 AM in response to Douglass Street Signage Legal?

So with my handle included in QOTD does that mean I am only 2 degrees of separation from same?

Posted by: 99luftballons at June 10, 2009 4:45 PM in response to Quote of the Day

As someone who has been in the cross hairs of many a dispute over whether we live in Cobble Hill or not, here's what the Cobble Hill Blog had to say about the Cobble Hill boundaries.

I think the reason the four blocks bounded by Court, Degraw (nth Side), Smith & Warren are included is that they're are zoned for the public elementary school in Cobble Hill.

http://cobblehillblog.com/archives/114

Simon

Posted by: 99luftballons at June 10, 2009 10:29 AM in response to Cobble Hill or Carroll Gardens?

You can also order photographs from the 1940's & 1980's from

http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/records/html/taxphotos/home.shtml

Although they can take sic weeks to arrive ours only took three.

TAX PHOTOGRAPHS
Between 1939 and 1941, and again in the mid-1980s, the city photographed every house and building in the five boroughs. Photographic prints of these unique images are now available for purchase.

HISTORY OF THIS COLLECTION:
During the 1930s, local governments began to use photography as a tool for appraising real property for taxation purposes. New York City was the largest municipality to adopt this technology. The result was 720,000 35mm black-and-white pictures of every building in the five boroughs. By the time the Municipal Archives accessioned the collection, the original nitrate negatives had begun to deteriorate and exhibit signs of "redox" blemishes (which look like giant snowflakes). With grant funds from federal, state, and private sources, the Archives duplicated the original negatives so that new prints can be produced and copied them to microfilm so that patrons can easily and safely view the entire collection.

By the early 1980s, the City’s Department of Finance, the agency responsible for appraising property for real estate tax purposes, determined that the 1940s photographs needed to be updated. From 1983 to 1988, again using 35mm cameras, their staff fanned out in the five Boroughs photographing every property, including vacant lots and tax-exempt buildings. They used color film stock resulting in over 800,000 photographs in both print and negative formats.

Posted by: 99luftballons at May 5, 2009 5:54 PM in response to Prints and Plans

By removing the wall and making the parlor (as the ad says) 20 feet wide it looks like you now enter the house directly into the living room with presumably only the space between the double entry door for raincoats, boots, hats, umbrella's etc.

Also if they need some drapes on those windows I have some highly slandered red ones I can sell them :~

But honestly for the life of me why the haste to put up a listing without complete photos and floor plans. As for the floor plans they must have filed them with the DOB so it isn't as if they don't exist.

Posted by: 99luftballons at May 5, 2009 3:56 PM in response to House of the Day: 481 4th Street

@ Posted by: salvpar at May 4, 2009 3:32 PM

what kind of contingency did you have? - None.

However given a choice of having 2m+ people see your finished work versus having them see your house unfinished because deadlines were missed is a pretty powerful incentive.

Our main contractor, The Pinnacle Group ( see http://www.brownstoner.com/forum/archives/2009/04/alex_and_simons.php ) worked wonders.

The risk they took was that they had to rely on all my other contractors to do their work as well as delivery of everything I ordered; kitchen cabinets, appliances, steel doors & windows, furniture, light fittings etc etc.

It truly was a team effort but having a drop dead date when TV cameras were involved made us all concentrate on that date. It was exhausting but we made it.

Mind you I would rather have an exhausting 9 weeks than a drawn out nine months.

Simon van Kempen

Posted by: 99luftballons at May 4, 2009 5:22 PM in response to Real Housewives: Simon and Alex's Renovation Revealed!

Just going through this to answer or respond to specific questions/statements. If I have missed any let me know. ;-)

@ cobblehiller at April 29, 2009 10:39 AM

We didn't have a sit down per se but we did refuse, this season, to do anything that wasn't real to us, unlike we did, on occasion, last season. Like everything, you live & learn and we certainly did from Season 1.

The comment about the 15th choice school was an exaggeration and at the time it was made our eldest son wasn't even attending that school. Despite being zoned for it he was wait listed and was attending another neighborhood school. Of course, by the time that scene aired he had changed schools and everyone's reaction was that it was a slight against his current school. Not sure that makes it any better but it is the truth.

@ Posted by: Architerrorist at April 29, 2009 10:44 AM

It definitely was on the wishlist. When we sold our Co-op in PS (which was zoned for PS321) and moved to Cobble Hill we absolutely were aware of the school zoning of the houses in which we were interested. Due to the current economy there are many NYC parents who wish they'd now paid more attention to school zones when they bought.

@ Posted by: sbuffon at April 29, 2009 11:19 AM

Last I checked our youngest son Johan doesn't have a French name. Both our sons were named in honor of my Father who died when I was just 5 years old. He was Dutch and his name was Francois Johan Walter van Kempen.

@ Posted by: Carol Gardens at April 29, 2009 12:23 PM

Thanks for your comment about sticking up for Brooklyn. A lot of people outside NYC and let's face it a lot of Manhattanites too, have this warped view that NYC=Manhattan. We certainly have been able to spread the word across the country about Brooklyn & are not ashamed in the least to live here. We moved from Manhattan in 2001, first to Park Slope & in 2005 to Cobble Hill and can never see us moving back to Manhattan. Those that don't know these areas have no idea how villagy they really are yet only a very short distance to Manhattan.

Oh & btw this thread didn't out me as 99LuftBalloons, I did that a month or two ago when Alex & I attended the last B'stoner gathering on Atlantic Ave.

@ Posted by: Ringo at April 29, 2009 12:41 PM

Opening the house up to local blogger scrutiny is nothing compared to the close to 2m people who watched this weeks episode! ;-)

Not sure why you'd think we about to sell our house. We're not and if we were why would we have decorated in such an individual style?

You're 'somewhat reliable source' is very wrong. We own the entire house and have done so since June 2005. NYC finance and property records are there for all to see and I have laughed several times at the misinformation posted by those who have looked at those sites and got it completely wrong and then posted their incorrect reading of those sites as 'fact'.

And lastly maybe we should host the next Brownstoner gathering at our house for you all to see it in person as there seems to be incredible interest it in and us!

Simon van Kempen

Posted by: 99luftballons at May 1, 2009 11:35 AM in response to Real Housewives: Simon and Alex's Renovation Revealed!

Sushi,

Although we've been blamed for appearing on a show that is contributing to the decline of Western civilization, your post is the first I've seen conjecturing whether we might be affecting property values too! ;-)

As to the timing - it is true that having to have the parlor level complete for the last of day of filming (Nov 1, 2008), concentrated the minds of EVERYONE working on the job to make that deadline, but who wouldn't want a drop dead finishing date. Having one really made the work drag out less than it would have otherwise and probably knocked three to four weeks of a normal schedule.

Simon van Kempen

Posted by: 99luftballons at May 1, 2009 9:50 AM in response to Real Housewives: Simon and Alex's Renovation Revealed!

Mellie

In the kitchen all you can really see is the fridge, range & hood in stainless steel. Yes we could have put cabinet doors on the fridge but I couldn't see the point.

Also as I kid I learned the expression to never look a gift horse in the mouth.

Simon van Kempen

Posted by: 99luftballons at April 30, 2009 11:04 PM in response to Real Housewives: Simon and Alex's Renovation Revealed!

bxgrl & Mrs Limestone

We've had 14 months of reading, & hearing of some really vile things written about us (and our children). Going through a process like this does wonders for one's self esteem. Alex & I are both very happy in ourselves and there is naught that any one, who doesn't know us, can say about us that gets us down.

We have met several people who, based on the show, absolutely hated us and without exception those who've talked to us with an open mind have left with a completely different, and better, impression of us.

Simon van Kempen

Posted by: 99luftballons at April 30, 2009 1:54 PM in response to Real Housewives: Simon and Alex's Renovation Revealed!

Boroughbred,

Well I've got to say that the show has succeeded in bringing out these passionate responses in many viewers - and you're one of them. If all that was shown was just bland people doing bland things there would be no audience and therefore no show. Thanks for watching and ensuring that our ratings are sufficiently high enough to warrant a 3rd season so we can come back & continue to annoy you! ;-)

Heather,

Yes, the kitchen cabinets as well as all the cabinets & flooring in our bedroom are Bamboo.

All ceilings and moldings are original as far as know; we have no reason to believe they were added later.

All furniture in the living & dining rooms is from Maurice Villency and all the fabrics on the sofas & dining chairs is eco-suede, which is made from recycled plastic bottles.

All lighting; sconces, chandeliers and table lamps in the living & dining rooms were bought on the Bowery & were made by http://schonbek.com/

More before, during & after pictures are up on our own website http://www.McCordvanKempen.com

Simon van Kempen

Posted by: 99luftballons at April 30, 2009 11:09 AM in response to Real Housewives: Simon and Alex's Renovation Revealed!

Billyboomer - It's not an either/or question! We go to/have both. ;-)

Posted by: 99luftballons at April 29, 2009 4:11 PM in response to Real Housewives: Simon and Alex's Renovation Revealed!

fsrq - I am not going to get in to a back & forth as this is a Brooklyn Real Estate blog and is not the forum for it. Additionally to do so via the written word is also not the best way to communicate.

You are certainly entitled to your own opinions based on the show as I am mine.

If you see us at a future Brownstoner gathering (Alex & I attended the last one) I am certainly prepared to discuss it with you in person.

best

Simon van Kempen

Posted by: 99luftballons at April 29, 2009 2:05 PM in response to Real Housewives: Simon and Alex's Renovation Revealed!

Well I always knew that our style of decor would draw nothing but controversy. Firstly the colors as captured above are not accurately reflected. Mr B took these images last night with a little digital point & shoot with a flash and that combined with the color adjustment on your individual computer monitors heavily distorts the actual color. This is not a complaint about Mr B's photos, just a comment to take into consideration when viewing them.

For those that seem to hate our house largely based on their hate or disdain for us I would say that while, yes we chose to appear on this show, it is VERY hard to get an accurate picture of any of the people who appear on it. For all of us, the best & worst aspects of our lives are the scenes that make it to air and it is very hard to capture the totality of who we are based on a few selected minutes of us each week over a 12 week period.

We will be posting many before, during & after pictures on our own website over the next few days for those that are interested.

The parlor level was completely renovated with all new plumbing, electrics, HVAC, new structural support I beams, a completely rebuilt extension rear wall, a new kitchen & 1/2 bath, as well as new flooring & sheet rock in a 9 week period between Sept 4th 2008 & November 1st 2008. We managed to keep all the original moldings as well as the original pocket doors and the tin & plaster ceilings. The ceiling rose in the living room is made of wood and that we kept as well.

For anyone who's renovated in NYC to achieve all of that under the glare of cameras in a 9 week period while complying with all NYC building codes, inspections and so on is remarkable and I am not afraid to say that! :D

Our main contractors, the Pinnacle Group did a sterling effort as did the electricians, plumbers/HVAC guys, steel & roofers, Kitchen cabinet manufacturers and so and and so on. Without their commitment to get this job in 9 weeks there is no way we would have finished in time.

Simon van Kempen

Posted by: 99luftballons at April 29, 2009 1:42 PM in response to Real Housewives: Simon and Alex's Renovation Revealed!

11217 - that's what always gets me about great apartments in great areas - they sell themselves and there's no way you need to put 6% in to the pocket of a broker. When we sold our Park Slope apartment in 2005, we built a little website, drew up a floor plan and posted pictures of every room and aspect. We heard from our eventual buyer in 14 hours after the ad went up, heard from their spouse 4 hours later (and they didn't know their better half had already emailed) and we had a deal with them in 72 hours. And we ended up getting $75k more than a Corcoran broker had told us we'd get.

Yes, we were lucky in that we found someone who loved our place immediately and never needed to have an open house, however even in a down market, great neighborhoods are still in demand and with a NY Times ad and a website more often than not I think you can do better (and split the 6%) than going with a broker.

Of course borderline areas can be a different story. There it's more likely a broker will earn their commission by bringing buyers who mightn't look in that particular area without some prodding.

Posted by: 99luftballons at April 7, 2009 2:09 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 32 8th Avenue

When one of our apartments was up for renewal at the end of Feb '09 we agreed a 6.5% reduction for a 12 month renewal. Perhaps our tenant could have gotten a similar apartment 10-12% lower but any saving would have been offset with moving costs (not to mention hassle and they know they have an attentive landlord).

For us it was a no brainer as although we've never had a problem renting it before a bird in the hand......

Posted by: 99luftballons at March 24, 2009 3:58 PM in response to Renegotiating Rent in PK Slope

lol @ TownHouseLady! ;-)

Posted by: 99luftballons at March 20, 2009 4:44 PM in response to Open Thread

Want to say a belated thanks to the welcome we received last night. Sorry we had to duck out but Parent/Teacher Conference called but we did come back after that 20 minute hiatus.

Alex & I are the last people to be offended by comments made about us. A few minutes of our lives picked out at random, while making good TV, doesn't give anyone a complete and total picture of who we are.

Those of you who watch the show might like to know that Aaron McDonald, the architect we worked with on our renovation, is also on Brownstoner and that's how I found him.

And yes DIBS we had had a minor leak in our extension which we reckon was built around the early 1910's. When we stripped it all back we realized that it was actually two extensions; first built only half way across the lot line and then later added to extend the full 22'.

If you interested we blog each episode of the show at http://www.McCordvanKempen.com and we're also posting a renovation blog each week as the work rolls out on the show.

We might just see you all at the next drinks too!

Simon

Posted by: 99luftballons at March 20, 2009 4:12 PM in response to Open Thread

I think someone should invite Alex & Simon.

Posted by: 99luftballons at March 13, 2009 11:56 AM in response to Friends of Brownstoner Gathering

B'stoner "It's not a huge house—about 2,400 square feet"

According to PropertyShark it's built 18 x 40 which makes 2,160, but P'shark says 2,430 - how do they get the extra 270, it doesn't mention an extension? The same kitchen is shown twice and needs a ton of work, and the 2 bathrooms shown in the photos aren't exactly screaming 2009.

I like BP's wording of "Owner's Choice Of Upper/Lower Duplex"
Presumably the lower duplex include the cellar? Perhaps why the didn't show the floorplan.

Yes it's in 321 but without seeing the floorplan it's hard to know how it works as a 2 family and what it might cost to use a 1 family.

Posted by: 99luftballons at February 23, 2009 1:43 PM in response to House of the Day: 356 1st Street

Who's Will?

Or should it read WELL BUILT TO SUIT

Posted by: 99luftballons at February 20, 2009 11:09 AM in response to Commercial Klutch: February Edition

I second the horrible lay out, and unless you have a huge family I really can't see why you'd need this much space, and if you did why you'd want it spread over 5 levels. Who'd want to walk down 3 flights of stairs to the garden level kitchen?????

We own a house, that although it's only 22" feet wide and 50 deep, the four of us manage to live perfectly well on three floors (including the finished cellar) (approx 3,000 sq ft) and rent out the other two levels.

In our three floors:
Parlor Level: Living. Dining and Kitchen with hug walk in pantry and a 1/2 bath.
Garden Level: 3 bedrooms; dressing room and two bathrooms
Cellar level: Gym/office, media/play room, laundry, 1/2 bath and huge storage

Our top two floors are both 1 bedroom + den floor through apartments and for the life of me I can never work out why 1 family would need to utilize so much carbon footprint to live in such a huge house as this.

Another thing with this floor plan is that the plumbing isn't in line on any floors so you are going to have risers all over the house.

That being said I'd say empty and if it's been gutted then mid to high 2's might sell it - just not to me.

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 29, 2009 2:24 PM in response to House of the Day: 370 Clinton Street

I live not far away in a 22 footer (fifty feet on two floors and 40' on the top two & cellar), total deemed 'habitable' 3,960 sq ft (despite what Property Shark says) but total usable is 4,840 sq ft. (and the finished cellar that cost us $200,000 in early 2007 ($227 psf) is way more than 'usable' with gym, media room, play room, laundry and 1/2 bath (all to code).

Like this one, my view is not the best however it is clear ground (which can't be built on) as opposed to a building that blocks my morning light. Also unlike this one we face the north/east so we get fabulous afternoon sun streaming into our back bedroom and kitchen (south/west facing).

Honestly I think $4.4 is a stretch. Honestly for the seller $3.5 would be an excellent price for this - but maybe $2.8-$3m is more likely as if I bought it (and given I just spent $400k on 2,200 sq ft with new kitchens, bathrooms, a/c etc) I'd want to rip out the kitchen and start again.

And as they don't show them probably the bathrooms too.

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 26, 2009 8:48 PM in response to House of the Day: 213 Congress Street

What makes a lifer? And aren't the influx of families that have moved into the hood over the last few years adding a potentially bigger lot of the next generation of lifers?

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 26, 2009 4:07 PM in response to Streetlevel: The Return of Chicory on Degraw

It's a double edged sword. I pay for home delivery seven days per week so would expect to get full online access for no additional fees. I would (probably) be happy to just get the weekend papers delivered and read everything else online during the week (which I pretty much do anyway). If that were to happen in sizeable numbers then the loss of print buyers midweek would then decimate their (already declining) display advertising revenue.

The death of newspapers throughout the country, particularly in small cities and towns,is a sad thing. Yes, bloggers are picking up a lot of slack but unpaid bloggers can't sit in the courts, local government centers and so on and report what goes on there. It's that sort of community news which is going to be lost and I am not sure that that's a good thing.

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 21, 2009 1:58 PM in response to (Slightly) Off-Topic Poll: Paying for The Times Online?

We have 4 gas burners with grill and griddle and while the grill is a pain, the griddle is a breeze and to wash the burners is easy as they're simple to remove and clean.

If ease of cleaning is more important then the quality of your cooking might I suggest you just get a microwave and some TV dinners and save a lot of hassle? ;-)

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 16, 2009 5:37 PM in response to Induction or electric cooktop?

DiBS - Incidentally this "german girl" is a 6'3" 200 lb+ Australian male but thanks for the visual, somehow I just can't me see me in pigtails and a bib!

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 16, 2009 4:38 PM in response to Induction or electric cooktop?

You left out gas from your choices, which just so happens to be the only precise way to accurately and quickly regulate your heat source. There's no better to cook than with gas.

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 16, 2009 4:26 PM in response to Induction or electric cooktop?

You left out gas from your choices, which just so happens to be the only precise way to accurately and quickly regulate your heat source. There's no better to cook than with gas.

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 16, 2009 4:23 PM in response to Induction or electric cooktop?

We lived in PS for 4 years (Co-op) and moved to Cobble Hill in '05 when we ought a t'house. We walk with the kids fairly regularly to the Promenade and when we do we always pop into the one of the playgrounds for the chums to play a little.

I love the streets of BH but no more than CH and while I agree the amenities on Montague aren't great their blocks of Court St are even worse. If it has to be a choice between PS and BH I'd choose PS but nothing will get me moving to either after living in CH.

Certainly where BH has it over PS is if you work on Wall St, as one Subway stop to work is damn convenient. Although, given the current economic climate that's important to a smaller number of people than it was even 6 months ago. Perhaps that might be the reason for parity in prices?

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 16, 2009 3:16 PM in response to Brooklyn Heights OR Park Slope?

deetrane

We used http://www.scordio.com/index.htm

Like others have said this is NOT something you can do with out using properly licensed,insured and experienced contractors and you must have all the requisite DOB permits.

Over the years old row houses settle/move and often all lean slightly on each other. The top of our house is approximately two inches inside our lot line and the integrity of the foundation is paramount. Both side walls are party walls with your neighbors (ours was brick but their side wall was timber) and underpinning needs to be done slowly, properly and carefully.

If this is done poorly the catastrophe that could occur is mind boggling and would open up an endless round of litigation.

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 9, 2009 12:01 PM in response to Estimates for Cellar Renovations

We did this in early 2007 and have a completely finished cellar with 8' ceiling height. It is now totally habitable space (without of course being deemed such by the DoB). We put in a 1/2 bath, huge laundry, reduced the size of the mechanical room, moved electric meters, built internal walls as well as had a matching (to the rest of the house) wooden staircase made with Mahogany railings, tiled the entire floor and put in radiant heat under the tiles. We also put in an I-beam to support main dividing wall running the full length of the house.

As this was the house's foundation we were dealing with we ended up not going with the cheapest contractor but probably the one who was most expensive but I wasn't prepared to take any risks and has watched this contractor build a house from scratch and knew I as getting top quality work.

The total we spent included architect and expediter fees (the DOB is a real pain and we had three goes at getting approval including eventually getting post amendment changes approved to what we'd originally applied for.) we also moved a ton of gas and waste pipes around the ceiling and while this was well worth it for to lean up the ceiling it added a lot to the cost. We own a three family and so had more pipes than most town houses and none of the 4 full and 2 1/2 bathrooms in the house share any plumbing. we also installed a sump pump for the cellar plumbing waste.

We have 5 rooms down there; 1) media room/Kids playroom, 2) Mechanical Room, 3) laundry, 4) 1/2 bath as well as 5) an office/gym.

Finished internal space is 20 x 38 although the foundation is 22 x 40 ( we didn't excavate the mechanical room which is approx 6 x 8)

Total cost $200,000

Posted by: 99luftballons at January 8, 2009 4:12 PM in response to Estimates for Cellar Renovations

re 3 3rd St in CARROLL GARDENS

According to ACRIS it went into contract 1/20/08 and closed on 8/20/08 $975,000. Obviously as soon as the new owner bought it (holding mortgages of $1,130,000 he tried to flip it for $1,395,000 on 8/25/08. When that didn't happen he did the conversion from a double duplex to a triplex w/garden rental and is now trying to get $1,895,000 for it.

Too bad that they couldn't be bothered to take into interior pictures when re-listing it.

Posted by: 99luftballons at December 19, 2008 4:43 PM in response to Open House Picks

OK so you didn't make a mistake on the Turkey because.....

its photographer did. No apostrophe required! ;-)

Posted by: 99luftballons at December 9, 2008 4:16 PM in response to Closing Bell: Dinner in Park Slope

B'Steve

While I haven't been to that new building I would say though that the corner of Schermerhorn & Hoyt is very different than Bergen between Smith & Court - and not in a good way.

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 24, 2008 1:56 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 56 Bergen Street FSBO

Some of us on this blog do live there. What exactly is dull about it?

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 20, 2008 12:28 PM in response to AMNY Does Cobble Hill

Yes and they do mean west but at least they acknowledge that Cobble Hill crosses Court Street. In my mind Cobble Hill includes the blocks south of Degraw between Smith & Court Streets at least as far north as Warren.

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 20, 2008 11:48 AM in response to AMNY Does Cobble Hill

I agree six burners are too many which is why we only got the four burner one. Although we also got the griddle and the grill and we love it.

And yes we've used the griddle and grill at the same time as 3 of the burners. Our 48" range will be working overtime when we feed 12 people around the Thanksgiving table next week.

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 19, 2008 4:42 PM in response to Today on the Brownstoner Backpages

which is why you do due diligence - yes we might have been lucky but we also interviewed the tenant before buying. Caveat emptor indeed but we tried to mitigate that as much as possible through due diligence.

All I am saying that it is worth looking at properties like this if you are likely to be in them for the long haul and not dismiss them outright.

(and that's a he not a she! ;-) )

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 17, 2008 8:38 PM in response to HOTD: 306 Washington Avenue, Two Price Cuts Later

I bought a house with a rent stabilized tenant over three years ago and while they pay negligible rent that barely covers the outlays I got a discount on the house of some $400,000 because of them. We have almost 5000 sq ft of livable and habitable space but only 4200 in 'habitable space'. In three years the only extra cost we've had (over and above utilities etc) is a broken apartment door lock. The tenant is a mother (90+) and daughter (50+) and their family have lived in (and once owned) the house since the early 1900's.

While we could try and evict them 1) we wouldn't because to me it's bad karma (remember we got that discount going in) and b) as someone above pointed out as one tenant is over 62 there's no point trying. But in the three years we've rented I would say that the market rent tenant has required more landlord work than the rent stabilized one.

If you're are in your property for the long hall then it is worth not discounting properties with rent stabilized tenants. As long as you do due diligence it isn't necessarily a bad decision and given that they scare most people away deals can be done.

We live in 3300+ sq ft and rent out two apartments of 880 + each and got in cheaply.

To me the biggest challenge with this property is four families are getting harder and harder to finance but it is worth doing the numbers to see if can work.

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 17, 2008 8:19 PM in response to HOTD: 306 Washington Avenue, Two Price Cuts Later

Boerum Hill - I'd suggest asking the owners of 54 Butler St as they did just that. Although they had to demolish the existing house rather than just building from scratch on a vacant lot.

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 14, 2008 3:53 PM in response to The Future of Construction Costs?

What's amazing is going back through the dozen or so posts about St Mark's Place. Everybody trashed the house as well as the website. But I guess Edie from the Brooklyn Estates & Properties who sold it had the last word: here's his post from 5/13.

I find it amusing that so many people are trashing the brownstone at 112 st Marks.In the first week we have had several nearly full price offers and only a week in half later we have a full price all cash deal in the works. It makes me wonder if some of the people putting down the house aren't actually bidders on the property trying to discourage their competition.
Asking price was 1.5
HMMMM
Edie at Brooklyn Estates & Properties

All I can say is given the cost of land as well as construction as long as the shell was basically in good order 1.5m for it is a lot less than the cost of new construction.
Posted by: brooklynestates at May 13, 2008 1:11 PM

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 14, 2008 12:55 PM in response to Open House Picks: Six Months Later

Can the neighbors sue for emotional distress in addition to the reduction of their own house values?

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 12, 2008 10:48 AM in response to A Mediterranean Makover

Lol - as if it's any worse than the Rite-Aid it replaced - both shops sell 95% crap but serve a need.

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 11, 2008 2:26 PM in response to Streetlevel: Closeout Shop for the Slope

Legally in New York City bedrooms in new developments must have minimum dimensions of 8'x10' x 8'(height); be above grade (ie 50% or more above the curb level) and have a window.

However in older buildings as long as plans exist in the DOB archives then smaller bedrooms are grandfathered in - you'll find in a lot of old townhouses that the garden level (basement) has a ceiling height of less than 8'. My children each have a bedroom that is 6'6" by 12' and these are more than big enough for them. As long as the smallest wall can fit the length of a bed then I don't really see a problem.

And as gkw said for young children or as a guest bedroom it's not really an issue at all.

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 11, 2008 1:12 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 45 7th Avenue

If I had my way all seating would be flip seating and would only able to be used by pregnant women as well as those who physically need to sit. There can never be enough seating during peak hours and rather than have 10% of the people sitting but taking up 30% of the space I would welcome a more equitable distribution of space.

Alternatively perhaps there could be one car per train with seating during peak hours allocated to those who are infirm or pregnant etc and all the rest were standing room only.

Posted by: 99luftballons at November 10, 2008 11:59 AM in response to New F Trains Leaving the Station

Personally I think we need to revisit some of the documents that are made available with no restriction over the internet--in particular ACRIS. Not sure why the entire world needs to be able to see my mortgage online. But, agree with the other folks, seems like blockshopper.com is just compiling information that's in the public domain.

Posted by: woodys at September 3, 2009 1:30 PM in response to Blockshopper

Disagree with other posters--this is total BS. Definitely worth bringing it to the AG's attention. Also worth bringing it to the attention of your local legislator (Assembly and Senate), and your local council member. Would also mention this to any organization that works in domestic violence.

And go through the stories on the website. Email the people in them. I'm sure they have no idea someone is doing this to them.

It's nonsense to suggest that laws which served to protect privacy in the non-computer age are sufficient for the information age. I mean, if stuff like this ends up the new standard of privacy, fine. But that should be something that we debate and have input on, and that people know about so they can try and take precautions. It shouldn't be something that just happens because we're working off laws that existed before google.

Posted by: bkrules at September 3, 2009 1:59 PM in response to Blockshopper

Years ago, you could go to the deeds office to get this stuff but no one probably bothered. Now everyone can know what I and my husband spent on our house last year. Fortunately, we don't have too much info about us on the tubes, or we weren't interesting enough to cobble together an article.

Nonetheless, I've wondered if folks that have not been able to contact me (and who I don't really want to deal with) might show up out of the woodwork someday.

Posted by: nk at September 3, 2009 2:19 PM in response to Blockshopper

I also think the law should be changed but the law now is pretty clear. Also making things not public just creates a way of charging people to get the same information. Government and the public operate best when things are open and above board. I do think it would be helpful if people knew what is going to be available from a public data base but making it non public isn't necessarily the best either. In any case the law now has very little protection on most information. Nothing wrong in trying to change it.

Posted by: smeyer418 at September 3, 2009 3:06 PM in response to Blockshopper

you wouldnt necessarily need to make the information non-public but you could restrict access, maybe make it only accesible with a username for which you'd need to provide your real name address etc. SOMEthing to lower the profile a bit, maybe also make it possible to trace who's accessed the documents, but still allow access to those that legitimately need it.

Also, I can see why some information is helpful to have online--like sale price etc--but why do we need the full mortgage document, amount borrowed, rate, etc? Like the unfortunate fellow that began this thread I think most people are unaware all this is online for any jerk to see (as is an image of signature on all documents, lovely that that's in the public domain).

Speaking of people contacting you out of the woodwork, I know we started getting all kinds of insurance offers (disability, life) right after we bought our place that referenced the fact that we were new homeowners...

Posted by: woodys at September 3, 2009 3:44 PM in response to Blockshopper

The information on acris can be extremely difficult to read and decipher particularly in instances where the existing owner has refinanced etc. Our information was lifted off ACRIS and debated on several different blogs (this one included) ad nauseum when we gained a little notoriety a couple of years ago and what I found funny (after initially feeling aghast that my financial privacy had been shattered) was that not one person was able to correctly identify our actual mortgage amount but consistently had it about $600k over what it is.

As NK said years ago you physically had to go to the clerks office to access this info but now it is on the web for all to see. BKRules I don't think the AG is really going to get involved - this information has always been in the public domain and all the internet has down is make it more accessible.

Posted by: 99luftballons at September 3, 2009 3:52 PM in response to Blockshopper

Ah yes! We have had the requisite rise in junk mail, and the scam that requests we pay them some amount for our own deed, but I'm more worried about the acquaintance who was "reborn" dropping by to try to convert us.

Posted by: nk at September 3, 2009 3:58 PM in response to Blockshopper

They did it to me as well. My company's pr agency picked it up in their media round-up and it got broadcasted to everybody in my office.

Really, really irritating.

Posted by: guywithahouse at September 3, 2009 9:30 PM in response to Blockshopper

I think finding information about given house is Ok (i.e. who is the owner, what was the sale prices, taxes, etc).

What disturbs me is the nyc.gov/etc access database free for taking with all this info. (I think it is called norpv_02152008brooklyn.xls). This one allows to search by person's name and see where this person has property and lives.

Posted by: bobjohn at September 4, 2009 1:51 AM in response to Blockshopper

Another scary .com is pipl.com. They collect every single public piece of information about you and group it into one handy dandy webpage, where basically people can find out where you have been living for the past decade or so, along with former telephone numbers, etc. Basically it's the same info that credit reports use to check that you are the true you. I contacted them to remove my page, and they also refused, on the basis that it's nothing more than already public information. They didn't care that I had a stalker in the past, and reasons for wanting to protect my privacy.

Posted by: townhouser at September 4, 2009 7:07 AM in response to Blockshopper