The Times Cozies Up to Clinton Hill
The Times gives a little love to Clinton Hill in one of its “Living In [x]” neighborhood snapshots, noting that Myrtle Avenue retail has been shaping up in the past few years and more money is coming into the community c/o well-heeled townhouse and condo buyers. The article also cites the area’s drawbacks, including its…
The Times gives a little love to Clinton Hill in one of its “Living In [x]” neighborhood snapshots, noting that Myrtle Avenue retail has been shaping up in the past few years and more money is coming into the community c/o well-heeled townhouse and condo buyers. The article also cites the area’s drawbacks, including its lack of some amenities, like a decent grocery, and its mediocre train access. Comps, per the story: Condos and co-ops are averaging about $500 per square foot; double duplex brownstones go from $1.2 million to $3 million, on average, according to a Fillmore broker, who says one-bedroom rentals average $1,600 to $2,000. (One Brownstoner reader already took exception with this price range as well as the out-of-date census data in the Forum yesterday.) The article also talks about the Society for Clinton Hill’s push to extend the neighborhood’s landmark district in the wake of condo developments like the Azure. You can just lose so much of your history by developers wanting to maximize the square footage, says Sharon Barnes, a member of the Society for Clinton Hill board. It’s really kind of a race against time.
Living in Clinton Hill [NY Times]
Frank Lynch.
“Those houses are better than anything in you’ll find in park slope. I’m not arguing that the neighborhood is better though.”
the babies are beginning to compare genitalia again. Please somebody stroke their egos quick.
Wow! Shahn Anderson finally said something I agree with. And I agree with it 100%. Way to go Shahn.
-Ella
i agree with you 10:34.
i have to say though…as an outsider…the article did not make me want to live in the neighborhood.
as someone looking to move to brooklyn, the way they describe the lack of amenities and the lack of trains and then those pricetags, i was like OH HELLZ TO THE NO.
i’ve done enough research to know those prices get you PRIME brooklyn.
they did a serious disservice to the neighbohood by overestimating the cost of housing.
3 million for clinton hill? is that for real?
i can get a townhouse on the best block in park slope for less right now. it’s confusing for those looking to move, i would think.
they should have used this photo above for the article, instead of the photo of fort greene!
The thing that got me about the article was how poorly researched it was in general. Even the image they used to lead it off—taken on Lafayette—was shot west of Vanderbilt. In other words solidly in Ft. Greene. And the mention of Ft. Greene Park and even the opening of Flea all in Ft. Greene.
I do like the fact that Ft. Greene and Clinton Hill share much of their respective communities, but if the Times wants to make artificial distinctions between the two by focusing on one or the other then it should be consistent about it and not refer SO much to Ft. Greene. Clinton Hill does have enough going on to fill out the space. Just lazy reporting. As usual.
In answer to 9:50’s question, no, those houses aren’t one families anymore. The brownstone one is broken up into high-end apts (coops, I think), and the white one is at least two apartments (also coops, if memory serves). Both beautiful, though the brownstone mansion was derelict for awhile and lost interior detail in the process. They’re at the corner of Lafayette and Clinton.
Totally agree. These houses are so much more beautiful than anything you will find in Park Slope. And the wide streets give the neighborhood so much more light too.
All the cars parked on St James Place near Fulton this morning for the filming of the Notorius BIG movie have Jersey plates.
Not so related to the Times article.
I don’t think there has ever been a 4 story brownstone in Clinton Hill that has sold for over 2 million.