Agreed that there seems to be a second wave of businesses coming in to replace some that have departed. In CG, on Court Street, we have Union Market for the long vacant Blockbuster site and some activity in the former Shakespeare's Sister. But there are lots and lots of vacancies and "Last Days" signs on Smith Street. I dont think one can draw any conclusions.

On the work at Miriams, I walked by yesterday and saw that the contractors were framing a new smaller doorway and eliminating the lovely glass front with cast iron columns. It does not bode well for that spot. (No permits visible, either).

Posted by: very bored at work at July 29, 2009 2:14 PM in response to StreetLevel: New Restaurant Opening on Court Street

I have to disagree that the loss of Panino'teca is a loss at all. It may have been a restaurant at the beginning, but quickly turned into another bar with a garden. If they had actually focused on food and not competing with the Zombie Hut next door, they might have made it. My sense is that the India had no idea how to run a restaurant (or a business), however "nice" she may have been.

Posted by: very bored at work at July 8, 2009 1:27 PM in response to Brooklyn Food & Drink Round-Up

By any stretch of the imagination, this is not a "good" location. This an incredibly busy intersection, where Boerum necks down from many lanes to less than two, with lots of traffic turning west to Pacific and even more turning east onto Dean. There currently is construction on both sides of Boerum at Atlantic.

After the construction is done, you are still essentially living on the Atlantic Avenue bypass.

Not a deal at this price; someone needs to figure out what the cost is to return to a four or three family and the potential rental income and see how that works.

Posted by: very bored at work at July 7, 2009 3:53 PM in response to House of the Day: 113 Boerum Place

From my personal experience -

You may not "need" to file with DOB but if you try to do significant other work, refinance, sell, or anything else that requires an inspection, survey, etc. and the deck is not known to DOB, you may have to try to legalize after the fact.

We coverted our one family w/o any C of O to a legal two family with a C of O and only because a prior survey showed the deck, we were grandfathered in and allowed to keep what would have been an otherwise illegal deck. We came very close to having to demolish but for the old survey.

Also, on propane, you can possess a canister, but you cant have it filled in New York City. The problem with using it on your backyard deck is its illegal to carry them through your house to get them there. We bring a crane in every few weeks to carry them over the house to the back yard. (just kidding on that last part)

Posted by: very bored at work at May 19, 2009 4:08 PM in response to Deck Question - 30' Restriction

sxm -

The MTA/TA is a State entity is not subject to the City building code or swo.

Generally, when there is significant subsurface work, the MTA's contractor will do surveys and take photos of all of the surrounding buildings to establish pre-existing conditions.

I have no specific knowledge of this situation, however.

Posted by: very bored at work at May 1, 2009 10:26 AM in response to BREAKING: Cracks at 44 Willoughby Street

Brownstoner - Can you check the dates on the Meier sale? From contract to closing to deed in less than one month? The street easy listing seems to show in contract in 2008.

Posted by: very bored at work at April 14, 2009 12:02 PM in response to Last Week's Biggest Sales

As for Brokers vs FSBOs, I own a two family and have used brokers for the rental. It saves me the time and effort of dealing with prospective tenants and has always resulted in a good experience from my perspective, and good tenants who have always renewed. Brokers do know the market and what the asking price should be.

When I used to rent, I hated dealing with the rental brokers, especially those who handed you a key and told you to find the place yourself, or showed you garbage that was nothing like what you wanted. But as an owner, its my preference, and I dont see the downside.

FYI - My my most recent rental started in Nov 2008, and its possible things have changed significantly since then.

Posted by: very bored at work at January 23, 2009 11:41 AM in response to Soft Rental Market?

The last post, I think, has it right. The owner violated the building permit by completing a much more significant renovation than allowed and violating the terms of the special district. There was an article (perhaps in the Times or Brooklyn Paper) on the issue. I could not find in a quick search.

I assume the commercial rent pays the carrying charges and more, so there is little incentive to fix the problem to rent the residential portion.

Posted by: very bored at work at January 14, 2009 3:29 PM in response to The Curious Case of 214-218 Atlantic Avenue

fsrg -

Here is a fact for you: The storefront wont rent because the location sucks and the rent is too high.

And apparently you "know" that non-project dwellers will patronize stores on Hoyt Street, but the opposite assertion is unsupportable?

Please share some of your RE expertise with the group and let us know why the store isnt renting.

Posted by: very bored at work at January 9, 2009 3:52 PM in response to High Hopes for Hoyt Street?

If someone thought they could make a go of it, it would have rented. It has been vacant for many months now.

There is no "near monopoly" here as there are several stores on Bond Street and down Hoyt directly across from the Gowanus Houses. The possibility of significant spillover from nearby brownstone and small apartment residents is almost nil.

Its always fun to comment, but lets have some facts to back up our assertions (or at least a modicum of familiarity with the location in question).

Posted by: very bored at work at January 9, 2009 1:58 PM in response to High Hopes for Hoyt Street?

The only thing that changes this transaction from any other landlord-tenant relationship is that its an owner occupied brownstone and the landlord has to consider who they will be living with. Unhappy destructive tenants are not fun.

The discussion about treating the market rate as something theoretical is insane. The market is what people will pay for the apartment - if you dont get that as an owner, you are leaving money on the table. Anything below market is a de facto subsidy to the tenant.

If you dont want to go to market by terminating the month to month, then do what others have suggested - raise the rent now and build in escalations over the terms of a multi-year lease.

Posted by: very bored at work at January 9, 2009 9:56 AM in response to Raising Rent, Followup

Seconding lots of the above comments, MP Bakes always seemed like a half-hearted effort. Also, that corner space must have (relatively) high rents, as it has cycled through numerous food establishments in the last several years.

Posted by: very bored at work at December 31, 2008 10:04 AM in response to Brooklyn Food & Drink Round-Up

Pete has it right. Once the liquor license is in hand, the "theme" can change. And, ask people who live above and near the Gowanus Yacht Club or the Zombie Hut how "quaint" they seem.

Posted by: very bored at work at December 15, 2008 11:23 AM in response to No Oyster Bar? How About a Methadone Clinic?

An idiotic renovation to accompany the Alfred E. Newman pricing.

To expand on bkny's comments, the duplex is essentially a one bedroom. To enter/exit the master suite, you have to pass through a common hallway. To make this a much more attractive triplex over garden rental requires significant renovation, including the removal of a kitchen on the top floor. Also, there dont seem to be any pictures of the garden level. For many years this was a rent controlled unit. I wonder if its been renovated at all.

Two other nits to pick - no central AC, and the building has almost no garden, as it abuts property on Henry Street.

Posted by: very bored at work at December 11, 2008 1:51 PM in response to House of the Day: 167 Baltic Street

I guess we can comment on the design, because the likelihood of this actually being built in the near future is nil. Thousands of units are coming on line in the near future and many will be converted to rentals. There are much more desirable communities with better transit access. Other than river views (which will soon be a dime a dozen - see the Edge, etc), whats the attraction here?

Posted by: very bored at work at November 21, 2008 1:54 PM in response to Here's What 40 Stories in Greenpoint Looks Like

Hard to imagine how any place that serves food and theoretically needs foot traffic to survive can do so in the short term here. Maybe a robust delivery business with low rents, but I am not sure. Good luck.

Posted by: very bored at work at November 7, 2008 10:22 AM in response to Streetlevel: New Café on Smith Street

What a load of crap. This is based on what analysis?

Whuh at 3:52 has it right.

No one knows how far prices will fall but to argue that "Central Brooklyn," whatever that means, is somehow immune is not rational. If 160,000 people in the in NYC lose their jobs next year (as the NYC Comptroller projects) owners will NEED to sell. And there will be no (or very few buyers, and still no liquidity). Also, numerous units in the "quality new construction" you cite are owned by speculators and investors who will run for the hills if they cant recoup their costs.

Its true that prices should hold better in more established neighborhood like Park Slope, Cobble Hill, etc. than in fringe neighborhoods, but prices will fall everywhere.

Posted by: very bored at work at November 4, 2008 4:48 PM in response to Quote of the Day

Am I missing something on the Nevins Street house? It looks awfully narrow and from the pathetic "floor plan." Also, there seem to be one full bathroom (on the first floor up) and two half baths for the rest of the place. Given this is in the historic district, they cant be selling the development rights. So why priced so high? The shag rugs do give it a nice 60s vibe though.

Posted by: very bored at work at October 31, 2008 4:49 PM in response to Open House Picks

We found ourselves in a very similar position in 1992. We had looked at a number of condos but were not ready to make the plunge at the asking prices. The brokers of the Mill (Carroll Gardens), then a new development, called us twice to offer price reductions.

I think "Lee's" analysis is quite suspect. If a developer needs cash, no matter the neighborhood, or his size, he will make deals. Smaller developers, without cash flow from other projects or cushions, may be much more likely to make a deal.

Posted by: very bored at work at October 27, 2008 5:18 PM in response to Quote of the Day

If you read the article in the Times, its truly ridiculous and an example of lazy sensationalist reporting. It makes it sound like 110 Livingston is in the middle of the Fulton Mall, surrounded by 99 cent stores, not a block from Brooklyn Heights.

Posted by: very bored at work at October 27, 2008 12:08 PM in response to Nestling In at 110 Livingston