Co-op of the Day: 110 Hicks Street
This is our fourth post on 110 Hicks Street since two of the units came on the market more than a year ago. In that time, both the lower duplex and the 2nd-floor one bedroom have had their asking prices reduced numerous times. Both units got trimmed again this week, bringing the duplex down to…
This is our fourth post on 110 Hicks Street since two of the units came on the market more than a year ago. In that time, both the lower duplex and the 2nd-floor one bedroom have had their asking prices reduced numerous times. Both units got trimmed again this week, bringing the duplex down to $1,550,000 from a starting price of $2,400,000 in October 2007 and the one-bedroom to $650,000 from an original $795,000. Where does it stop?
110 Hicks Street, 1 BR [Douglas Elliman] GMAP
110 Hicks Street, Duplex [Douglas Elliman] P*Shark
Co-op of the Day: 110 Hicks Street [Brownstoner]
Co-op of the Day: 110 Hicks Street, Reduced Again [Brownstoner]
Co-op of the Day: 110 Hicks Street, Reduced [Brownstoner]
Co-op of the Day: ‘Spensive on Hicks [Brownstoner]
wine lover –
I understand 1.5 Million won’t get you a full brownstone in BH … but what I’m saying is, I don’t care enough about living in Brooklyn Heights that it’d be worth it to me to spend 1.5mm on a condo, instead of going to, say, Prospect Heights and spending the 1.5mm on a full brownstone.
There is a point for me where location matters, for sure, but owning my own building a little further into Brooklyn definitely trumps only owning a duplex in BH. Honestly, I don’t even like BH that much. It’s kind of boring. 🙂
well no one is buying a whole brownstone in BH for 1.5 for sure. i bought a whole brownstone in CH in ’97 for $650K and even then, a BH condo duplex was listed at $750K. BH is expensive.
location people.
Benson,
I think that when the original owner decided to convert the brownstone into the three units, there was a mortgage on the property that he/she couldn’t pay off right away. I think condo conversion is only possible when there’s NO mortgage on the property. Therefore, coop was probably the only way to go.
It seems very weird to me that these three units are being sold as a co-op, rather than a condo. I’ve never heard of this before, though I admit that I haven’t looked too deeply into these types of units.
Does anybody have any idea as to why they would structure this as a co-op rather than a condo?
I agree that this should be marketed as a 3-family house. A three unit co-op or condo just doesn’t seem workable.
so in a 3 unit co-op where 2 units are for sale… do the owners of the one remaining unit basically get to hand-pick who they want to live with (assuming somebody eventually makes an offer)?
I don’t get it either cwb…
Whoops, didn’t realize it was three total units.
Over 1.5 million, no matter how much I liked the location, I’d have a hard time rationalizing buying a condo in a brownstone when I could go elsewhere and just … buy a brownstone.
i think that this is an OK layout, but just priced wrong.
As pointed out above, this is a 3-unit co-op. There’s another duplex above. Only 2 of the units are for sale.
The problem with the lower duplex is the layout. It’s 1800-1900 sf but only 2 bedrooms. Who needs a 18×12 bedroom when you have a little galley kitchen? Same with the extra bathroom.
I think the sellers must have been wowed by the prices similarly-sized apartments were fetching in the neighborhood in past years and not accounted for the fact that those were laid out as proper 3-4 bedrooms, on single floors in apartment buildings that didn’t have the drawbacks that this house layout imposes.