Condo of the Day: 338 2nd Street, #3C
We’re not big fans of the exterior of this building at 338 2nd Street and its sister buildings on the block but we gotta say that the interiors are quite nice: lots of light, high ceilings, open layout, even a sliver of outdoor space. So it’ll be interesting to see if the two-bedroom, two-bath FSBO…
We’re not big fans of the exterior of this building at 338 2nd Street and its sister buildings on the block but we gotta say that the interiors are quite nice: lots of light, high ceilings, open layout, even a sliver of outdoor space. So it’ll be interesting to see if the two-bedroom, two-bath FSBO can command its asking price of $789,000. Given that the apartment is only 880 square feet, this feels pretty pricey but the common charges are very low and it’s in a fun location so who knows! Time will tell…
338 2nd Street, #3C [FSBO] GMAP P*Shark
If you look at the floorplan the Sq ft is really more like 950 plus the outdoor space. So if this wasnt FSBO the listed sq ft would be 1000K.
Im with you Heather – I cant imagine living in a 2-BR that is only 850 SF. I did the 350 SF studio, and 550 SF 1-BR. Could never go back to cramped space. Pre-war is the way to go…
“Why can’t new construction at least equal the square footage of pre and postwar stuff built for the working class? ”
Because you make more money by fitting as many units as possible into a project.
This place is ideal location and elevators open right into your apartment. Layout is terrific and nice big balconies out the back. Building has had some issues with original developers Boymelgreen and they were paid pennies on the $ to settle. That said the middle apartments are the sweet spot in this building and I wouldn’t be suprised if this goes close to ask. We used to live there and sold FSBO easily back in 2007. Two open houses and job done. No nasty broker fee in sight…..
Hey Boremhill – what makes you think comps from 2007 equal comps for 2011? In 2007 you didn’t have all the condos in the 321 school zone, now you can get a brand new one – same size right down the street at 560 Carroll street for less than this place per square foot. Condos are priced per square foot. I could see this one for maybe $700k at the end of the day at best- but who knows.
This lost me at 880 square feet and two bedroom.
Why can’t new construction at least equal the square footage of pre and postwar stuff built for the working class?
It came from Streeteasy, that sale of $760,000 was from July 2010.
There are a lot of people who love new build. The prospect of renovating turns a lot of people off. Living in construction for months, workman not showing up when they said they would, wondering if you should change contractors part of the way though, final punch list items never finished, ect. That’s all just from complaints people have posted on brownstoner. There’s a few recent threads with people asking what a reasonable price is for an architect. For a lot of people it’s a frightening process they know nothing about. It certainly turned me off of a lot of places.
gemini10 –
If you think its overpriced, I assume you have comps to back that up?
Usually ask needs to be supported by comps. This one is.
Sales in this Building
* 4/20/2007
* 3C
* 865 sq ft
* $739,000
* 1/3/2007
* 3D
* 865 sq ft
* $704,00
…
NYGuy7 on March 3, 2011 1:37 PM
Unit 3D with the same floor plan but opposite sold for 760,000
…
Not sure where this came from but sounds plausible, I’ll assume you are correct.
Gem, I don’t disagree with you, I would much rather spend a similar amount for the same square footage IN A PREWAR and IN A BETTER LOCATION. It makes no sense to me. But it had a market before, and if closes, we have to admit it has one now. I would never, ever, in a million effing years consider living on this block. You can def do better at that price – but apparently not everyone feels that way.
SO here’s my question which isn’t meant to be snarky
Why is this apt that is a 2br/2bth at 880sqft selling for 789k?