House of the Day: Carroll Gardens FSBO
Everyone knows we’re a sucker for a FSBO listing, so no surprise that we’re taking a look at this one at 306 Union Street in Carroll Gardens. The four-story brick house has 3,900 square feet above grade and another 800-square-foot English basement. It’s currently configured as a four-family and looks to us to be in…

Everyone knows we’re a sucker for a FSBO listing, so no surprise that we’re taking a look at this one at 306 Union Street in Carroll Gardens. The four-story brick house has 3,900 square feet above grade and another 800-square-foot English basement. It’s currently configured as a four-family and looks to us to be in decent shape–though some of the kitchens and bathrooms leave us feeling a little limp, though if you’re going to convert to a one- or two-family, most of those will get ripped out anyway. (See for yourself at the open house on Sunday from 2-4.) The current owners did a lot of work on the place when they bought several years ago–including restoring the parquet floors (our favorite from the photos) and tin ceilings. The owners’ favorite detail? The original crown moldings. The location–a block from the trains and restaurants–is appealing as well. Given that this place will most likely need some dough plowed into it (whether to improve some of the finishes and fixtures or to change the configuration), the $2.2 million ask may be a bit of a stretch, but it is a 22-footer in an increasingly desirable area, so who knows. How do people think this stacks up against Monday’s HOTD on Dean Street?
Carroll Gardens FSBO [306 Union Street] GMAP P*Shark
ok genious, what’s the truth?
Most of the comments in this thread are factually incorrect. What is the point of people posting misinformation? I hope no one actually believes any of this.
THERE ARE MANY CHEAP PLACES TO LIVE IN THIS COUNTRY. IF YOU CAN’T AFFORD THE RITZ, STAY AT MOTEL SIX. IF MANHATTAN IS TOO EXPENSIVE, MOVE TO QUEENS. IF NEW YORK CITY IS TOO EXPENSIVE, MOVE TO NEW JERSEY.
THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IS NOT TO PROVIDE CHEAP HOUSING SO PEOPLE WITH LIMITED INCOMES CAN AFFORD TO LIVE WHEREVER THEY WANT. GOVERNMENT SHOULD ONLY STEP IN TO STAVE OFF HOMELESSNESS — NOT TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO LIVE CHEAPLY OR FOR FREE IN EXPENSIVE PLACES.
EVERYONE LOVES A DEAL, BUT WHEN THAT DEAL COMES AT THE EXPENSE OF ANOTHER PRIVATE CITIZEN WHO ALSO HAPPENS TO BE A TAX PAYING LANDLORD, I IT’S NOT A DEAL — IT’S ROBBERY AND SHOULD BE OUTLAWED.
ONE DAY, THE COURTS WILL OVERTURN THESE ANTIQUATED NEW YORK LAWS.
Tinarina,
When the rent in a rent stabilized apartment increases above $2000/mo, the apartment is only destabilzed once the current tenant VACATES.
If a landlord can prove that a tenant makes over $175,000/yr AND the legal rent is over $2000/mo, the apartment can be destabilzed. This makes no sense. In effect the law says that a rich person who pays $500/mo can keep his sweetheart deal while a rich guy with a rent of $2000/mo can’t. ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF GOVERNMENT LUNACY.
I know someone who pays $25/mo (THAT’s RIGHT TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS) for a two bedroom apartment with a river view on the lower east side. The apartment is in the mother’s name. Both daughters are about 30, make about 100k/yr, and live with their mother. Thank god for for the rent laws. They’d obviously be homeless without them — YEAH RIGHT!
I totally agree with the last comment. But until the revolution comes we aren’t going to be taxing the rich enough to create enough subsidized housing. Traditionally buildings which are rent stabilized have been priced accordingly. recently however, people have paid premium prices for them and then gone boo-hoo when they are stuck with lower rentals. The info above about when apartments are de-stabilized is not correct, btw. I believe it is the combination of 175k income in last two years and getting close to 2k, not one or the either. reality is that the laws are increasingly favoring the rich and landed over the poor and renting. Nice country if you can afford it…
rent control makes everyone a loser except for a lucky few who are paying 500 or less a month for no reason other than they stumbled into signing a (market price) lease 20 years ago and at that time probably had no plans to spend the rest of their lives there.
I have seen lovely townhouses that could be improved or preserved to include affordable floor thru rentals (1500 a month) that are rendered useless because obne or more tenants are hanging on grimly and are never going to leave.
it locks up property and creates little running sores in nice neighborhoods maintained to a bare minimum.
The overall cost of rent control to society is huge.
If society really wants to pay the rent for some lucky people, make it transparent — take it out of everyones taxes and send the tenants fat checks every month! It is the same thing, just makes the situation unpalatably clear.
As a Carroll Gardens homeowner, I can’t believe there’s a market at this price. Also, those rents seem high at $1,900 per floor for 836 sq. ft apartment (only 22 x 38) — we rent out a 900 sq. ft one (20 x 45) for $1,850 in what might be considered a better location (2nd Place) and never raised the rent in 4 years because we felt as if we were overcharging — have rents really increased that much in the last year? During our last turnover 2 years ago they were far less.
I’ve seen some of those better values and all those needed extensive amount of work. They’ve been on the market for a while.
slightly too high per square foot.
better location IMO, same price per sq ft:
http://www.elliman.com/Listing.aspx?ListingID=769742&SearchType=sale
$1.7m