A lot of interior space with no light. Most layouts are long spaces with windows on one wall -- the livingroom/kitchen. So all other "rooms" have no windows or ventilation.

The other thing is that most of these units are not likely to appreciate any time soon -- they will always be plagued by the poor layouts.

Posted by: BH76 at November 18, 2009 11:23 AM in response to A Few More Sales Trickle In at BellTel

If you bought a "luxury" condo (whatever you may think that means) across the street from the HOD, down a block or two from a pawn broker. near several bail bondsmen, and around the corner from a 24x7 criminal court and thought that the neighborhood was going to change because you moved it, you are more than delusional.

That said, no e of the above-noted things is a detriment to the quality of life in the neighborhood (except for the correction officers taking parking and not moving their cars for weeks at a time).

Posted by: BH76 at November 11, 2009 3:55 PM in response to StreetLevel: New Bail Bonds Office Closed Til Next Year

au bon pain is crappy -- and in MT just down the block. Most likely a crappy chain like Olive Garden or Red Lobster -- for the folks at the Marriott who need the comfort of home and all the back-office workers at MT adn the courts.

Posted by: BH76 at November 11, 2009 2:29 PM in response to 'Nationally Known' Restaurants May Land in 345 Adams

I would want to know when the real estate tax abatemeent runs out -- this will be a $500+/month tax bill too.

Posted by: BH76 at November 11, 2009 1:24 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 110 Livingston Street, #8O

Morton's may not be high-end but it is easily $100 for (a mediocre)dinner(for one).

Posted by: BH76 at November 11, 2009 10:04 AM in response to 'Nationally Known' Restaurants May Land in 345 Adams

why the map of St. Louis??????

Posted by: BH76 at November 11, 2009 9:37 AM in response to 'Nationally Known' Restaurants May Land in 345 Adams

Donatella;
This building happens to be a very well-run 25+-year-old coop with financials that banks deem attractive.

The tax situation for cooperatives is insane. The fact that a relatively small coop apartment is paying at least, if not more than, twice what a $2MM+ home (with or without a rental unit) pays is unjust. This coop owner effectively subsidizes the owners of the multimillion dollar homes in the Heights.

I can only imagine what will happen with all the new condos once the abatements go away.

Posted by: BH76 at November 11, 2009 9:33 AM in response to Co-op of the Day: 96 Schermerhorn Street, PH-L

There is nothing under the building (no parking lot). Real estate taxes are about 25% of the maintenance... so the city is getting about $6K a year for this.

Posted by: BH76 at November 10, 2009 2:33 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 96 Schermerhorn Street, PH-L

If I did not already like the Flea, these would make me lose any interest in going...

Posted by: BH76 at November 9, 2009 10:37 AM in response to The Flea In Tweets

As to the philosophical... I think it is the people whom you know and know you as you walk around (possibly even crossing real estate "boundaries"). Long after (like 15 years) I left the village, and before it finally closed, the fish guys at Jefferson Market still knew me when I walked in. I still felt like it was my neighborhood then.

Posted by: BH76 at November 9, 2009 10:33 AM in response to Creative (Desperate?) Neighborhood Rebranding

Don't make yourself crazy. If the sponsor/creditors control half the building there is nothing you can do regardless.The control the Board.

Posted by: BH76 at November 3, 2009 10:12 AM in response to Condo Elections

Grand Pa is right -- the mayor of Miami oversaw a lot of new construciton too! And that of Vegas -- so what? It was everywhere!

Posted by: BH76 at October 29, 2009 10:47 AM in response to Evaluating the Mayor's Development Legacy

The Boltons are a great couple and this new place(if you do not already know Saul) will be the same warm and graceful place with no mis-steps I am sure. Can't wait to go!

Posted by: BH76 at October 28, 2009 2:41 PM in response to Brooklyn Food & Drink Round-Up

This is the building that had been roundly (and I thought, unfairly) mocked in the past. Still why would one pay more than $399K for it?

Posted by: BH76 at October 28, 2009 2:34 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 200 Congress Street, #1A

It can. Others have failed before....

Posted by: BH76 at October 28, 2009 2:32 PM in response to Streetlevel: Restaurant at 7 Old Fulton Street

We did 11 years ago and spent about $60K then (although we did not have to do a lot of redesigning)and have about 1500 sq. ft. The real drawback is that people balk at the maintenance (which is high -- hw can it not be?). In this market, I would only do it if I intended to stay a long time. These large units with high monthly costs are not an easy sell except in boom times, when you can get a premium. Now the price is actually discounted from where it woudl be if it were two units. Still, I could not give up the space!

Posted by: BH76 at October 22, 2009 8:50 AM in response to Combining Apartments

I'm with Snark. There is already an over-abundance of retail and office space sitting empty. And all these new buildings get so many tax exemptions/deferrals that they cost (in this econmy) the city and state rather than add to any revenues.

Posted by: BH76 at October 20, 2009 1:33 PM in response to What Could Have Been on Flatbush

Very nice, large studio that could be remodeled to b a less-than-ideal one-bedroom. No more than $660K and it has to be the right person (not even sure a couple would want this space).

Posted by: BH76 at October 20, 2009 1:28 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 55 Berry Street, #5D

That block is not really the Heights but Boerum Hill or DT. Heights ends on the other side of Court Street (Boerum Hill goes to south side of Schermerhorn and up to Court (by standards of Boreum Hill Assn.)

Posted by: BH76 at October 19, 2009 4:44 PM in response to Streetlevel: New Nails Spot for The Heights

Any responsible coop board prefers to have resident shareholders who can pay their own bills. It is generally not a problem with a co-owner but can be (and thery may have been purned one way or another in the past). They are looking out not for your interest but fo that of all the shareholders. And many people do not appreciate the wealthy trying to get what they want by avoiding taxes (gist tax).

Posted by: BH76 at October 19, 2009 2:06 PM in response to Co-Purchaser vs. Guarantor

$100 for a one-bedroom is about right, even if the aprtment is empty all day most days.

Posted by: BH76 at October 16, 2009 6:36 PM in response to ConEd newbie bill question

Take a $100K off for being a 4th floor walk-up.. then start talking...

Posted by: BH76 at October 15, 2009 4:28 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 310 Windsor Place, #26

3Q 2007 looks like the peak from my building's experience.

Posted by: BH76 at October 15, 2009 10:20 AM in response to Elliman Q3 Report: Better Than Q2

But how many Totos?

Posted by: BH76 at October 14, 2009 9:54 AM in response to Closing Bell: Two beds, 11 Baths?

Whatever you do in an apartment costs about 2X labor than in a house. I would say $15 for bath and $20K for kitchen for licensed insured contractor. And I would not be so sure you can get things cheaper on your own.

Posted by: BH76 at October 9, 2009 12:18 PM in response to Cost of Kitchen & Bath Gut?

Whether your maintenace is reasonable depends on your building's expenses -- not anyone else! Look at your financials! Your budget!

Posted by: BH76 at October 7, 2009 4:23 PM in response to How To Compare Maintenance

I walked by this last week and up close this building looks like it is made of plastic -- really cheap. I can only imagine what it will look like in 10 years.

Posted by: BH76 at October 7, 2009 2:53 PM in response to Development Watch: Aloft on Duffield

"Reasonable" depends on so many things...most importantly the underlying mortgage and taxes. A full-service building is at least $1.50+ depending on neighborhood and size (number of units)these days.

Posted by: BH76 at October 7, 2009 1:45 PM in response to How To Compare Maintenance

How is $750 a month maintenance for a walk-up (one-bedroom chopped into two) apartment neither here nor there? It's cute but why would you buy this for even $500K?

Posted by: BH76 at October 7, 2009 12:59 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 25 South Oxford Street, #5

A buyer at auction must be approved by the Coop Board and is subject to all the same regulations as all other shareholders (no investors, etc.).

Posted by: BH76 at October 7, 2009 11:19 AM in response to 280 Hicks, Many Others, Fail to Sell at Auction

It may be nice for a single but once you have two people using it ... disturbing in the night or morning.

Posted by: BH76 at October 6, 2009 3:49 PM in response to En Suite bathroom

Ringo: I would not be so hasty to castigate the Board on this one. There may be very good reasons they nixed it. And remember, board members pay the same fees as all the other shareholders.

Posted by: BH76 at October 6, 2009 11:44 AM in response to Tea Lounge Closing and Unopening

The powder room literally next to the bath is odd. If possible, better to put the washer/dryer there as there is no place in the "kitchen."

Posted by: BH76 at October 5, 2009 1:22 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 66 Orange Street, #3C

Pete -- I was told this by someone in the local business group at the time; and there were/are a lot of storefronts. I enjoyed the men playing dominos on the corner of Smith and Pacific; they kept an eye out. Further up Smith it was a bit dicier back then.

Posted by: BH76 at October 5, 2009 10:32 AM in response to Boerum Hill: In a Nutshell

In the late '80s-early 90s there were crack viles found in the playground at 261 and hookers on the stoops of Pacific Street. PS 261 really should have been in the article as that school was a key part of the neighborhood becoming family friendly. Many Smith Street businesses had no discernable business, except for the bodegas, the butcher, dollar stores, and Johhney's bootery.

Posted by: BH76 at October 5, 2009 10:13 AM in response to Boerum Hill: In a Nutshell

I meant $350K for State Street....

Posted by: BH76 at October 2, 2009 4:39 PM in response to Open House Picks: Six Months Later

I would not say that the State Street house was not listed at $4350K in 1995. As I recall, the house may have had structural problems and it was literally against what looked to be abandoned buildings -- a real eyesore. And no one knew what was going to go in the space (the owner of the lot on Court would not sell -- only lease). There was a house on Schermerhorn in only slightly beter shape. I recall someone buying a house in Boerum Hill (one of the small ones -- perhaps on Wyckoff?) in the late 90s for $375K and we all though it was crazy. But then you could get a one-bedroom coop in a FS building for $50K in 94-98. 1994-99 were the bad years....for real estate anyway.

Posted by: BH76 at October 2, 2009 4:38 PM in response to Open House Picks: Six Months Later

In the early 90s (90-95) brownstones (unrennovated) in Cobble Hill and Boerum Hill were going for $400K+. And most were unronnvoated. None had master suites or chef's kitchens or waterworks bath fixtures.

Posted by: BH76 at October 2, 2009 2:51 PM in response to Open House Picks: Six Months Later

I must say these units have a lot of closets/storage (the 2-bedroom floorplan) but, except for the really large unit, (bed)room sizes are not so grand. My late in-laws would have loved it.

Posted by: BH76 at October 2, 2009 10:39 AM in response to The Venetian Unveiled

No matter when you close, you can only claim the tax deduction to which you are entitlted (% of the year that you owned).

Posted by: BH76 at October 2, 2009 8:55 AM in response to Property Taxes and Co-ops

Agree. List at $625 be ready to take $590. That's if you want to sell in a reasonable amount of time.

Posted by: BH76 at October 1, 2009 5:13 PM in response to Price My Apartment

Minmin...Yes. In coops, size does matter. We have about 100 units so are required to have live-in super and 2 FT porters. The building systems are complex, more expensive (elevators??). And we do not get the economies of scale that we would if we had 50% more units. The cheaper per share maintenance is either for very small or very large coops. But then there are the other issues -- we do not have a problem if a few owners are behind... and we are really more of a community that if we were larger.

Posted by: BH76 at October 1, 2009 5:11 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 30 Ocean Parkway, #1F

Know what's really ironic? The people on State and Schermerhorn (the other side of the Ratner monstrosity cinema/B&N actually fought a potential supermarket (ohhh -- the big bad delivery trucks!) to get this instead! As a former neighbor told me, most of them are in their country/beach homes on the weekends so have no concept of the crowds that the cinema gets!

Posted by: BH76 at October 1, 2009 5:05 PM in response to House of the Day: 171 State Street

Our coop's operating budget is 23% R/E taxes, 25% mortgage, 15% labor and 14% energy -- not much room to maneuver. And no matter what you say, people cannot understand why it isn't decreasing!

Posted by: BH76 at October 1, 2009 3:37 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 30 Ocean Parkway, #1F

no floorplan -- just some mock up photos - who can tell what it's like?

Posted by: BH76 at September 30, 2009 1:48 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 125 North 10th Street, #NPHD

If Henry Street sold for $2.2MM that is the steal of the year. I cannot imagine it.

Posted by: BH76 at September 30, 2009 11:09 AM in response to Last Week's Biggest Sales

Same line -- looks totally different...http://www.prudentialelliman.com/listings.ASpx?listingid=1142926&utm_source=Streeteasy&utm_campaign=corporate&utm_medium=listings

Posted by: BH76 at September 29, 2009 5:24 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 96 Schermerhorn Street, #9G

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/08/garden/08chambers.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

a more typical apartment inthe building

Posted by: BH76 at September 29, 2009 1:33 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 96 Schermerhorn Street, #9G

There are no bedbugs. The hallways do not smell of urine -- you have obviously not been in the building -- and it was the original St. John's University Law School.

Also, it is, for what it's worth, in Boerum Hill, which ends on that side of Schermerhorn. There are a couple regular one-bedrooms for not much more in the building.

Posted by: BH76 at September 29, 2009 1:19 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 96 Schermerhorn Street, #9G