Co-op of the Day: 156 Prospect Park West, #4R
This three-bedroom co-op at 156 Prospect Park West should be an interesting measure of the Park Slope market. The 1,100-square-foot pad traded for $785,000 in early 2007. It’s now back on for $829,000. We like everything about it except the kitchen. The floors and windows are particularly charming—and the exclusive roof rights are a nice…
This three-bedroom co-op at 156 Prospect Park West should be an interesting measure of the Park Slope market. The 1,100-square-foot pad traded for $785,000 in early 2007. It’s now back on for $829,000. We like everything about it except the kitchen. The floors and windows are particularly charming—and the exclusive roof rights are a nice kicker. We also like the fact that the monthly maintenance is only $533. How do you think it’ll fare?
156 Prospect Park West, #4R [Corcoran] GMAP P*Shark
I think 11217 makes good points about what someone will get, in a great location (come on, right off the park!), at a decent price for a 3-bedroom. That said, it’s basically a 2-bedroom, 4th floor walk-up, with a washer-dryer in the home office. Pass.
tybur, very nice to see you back among the living!
i think this would be a lovely location, especially for anyone who relishes easy access to the park. i live pretty close-by and i think the only downside would be having to trek down two avenues for access to a thriving varied retail strip (and then trudge back uphill two avenues to get home).
my real issue is the layout. your guests enter next to the kitchen and must traipse through the kitchen and dining room to get to the living room. ditto (in reverse) to get to the bathroom. your W/D is only accessible through the kitchen, so you’re dragging your dirties down that long hallway and into the kitchen every time.
layout positives: largest bedroom is back-facing and (agree w/gemini) killer butler’s pantry.
oh, have to add that yes, 4th floor walk-ups are tough, even for the childless. i did that for 3 years and i really don’t think i’d do it again. especially not with kids.
And while we’re at it, the entire length of CPW isn’t all spectacular, either. Again, it’s the mixture of masterpieces and ordinary buildings that makes it work. Too much rich candy is not good for anyone, you need some ordinary meat and potatoes and veggies in the mix. That goes for architecture as well as a good meal.
“Someone will eventually buy this apartment, walk-up, and W/D hookup and all, and be quite happy to have it, and will appreciate its period details and whatever else in it that suits their fancy. That’s reason enough to leave it alone.”
Exactly!
And to further your point Montrose, if it were Benson’s dream to build an apartment house here (one which would actually fit into the architectural gems of PPW and not a 4th Avenue sh*tbox) the prices would be through the roof and no where near as affordable as this place is.
Think 15 Central Park West where apartments sell for $5,000 psf.
Oh, Benson, please.
First of all, it’s the diversity of architecture on PPW that makes it interesting. Some blocks are better than others, so what? Thank God the “naturalness” of development was halted, or we would have lost a huge swath of important and beautiful architecture along PPW, again, it’s the mixture of the sublime, the decent and the “eh” that make it work. Yeah, I would have liked to have been able to appreciate some of the robber baron mansions that were torn down to build the big apt buildings of the 20’s, but at least most of them are great apt buildings. Tearing this tenement down to build what? The usual 4th Ave POS, supposedly “high end, luxury condos” I don’t think so.
Someone will eventually buy this apartment, walk-up, and W/D hookup and all, and be quite happy to have it, and will appreciate its period details and whatever else in it that suits their fancy. That’s reason enough to leave it alone.
Since you’re comparing it to CPW, the upper end of it (compared to the lower end of PPW where this is) is quite “lifeless” also.
Anything above 86th Street on CPW is pretty dead unless it’s a sunny spring or summer day.
It’s interesting that you would use the word lifeless though to describe a block which looks out onto more life (tree and wildlife) than most blocks in the entire city.
I won’t say that the building should be torn down, but it certainly wouldn’t get my knickers in a knot to see the interior gutted from stem to stern and better, more sensible layouts created.
That WAS contained, benson. Well done. Not sarcastic.
I don’t know this part of the street well enough to know if it’s lifeless or not. But is this really a glorified tenement? Seems grander than that.
I’m kind of with Benson on this one…