House of the Day: A New Era In The Slope?
This North Sloper looks like a sign of the times to us. As far as we can tell, this would have been asking north of $2 million just a few months ago. Now, at $1.795 million, the location and historic integrity of the building make this pretty attractive, we think. Perhaps there’s a bit of…
This North Sloper looks like a sign of the times to us. As far as we can tell, this would have been asking north of $2 million just a few months ago. Now, at $1.795 million, the location and historic integrity of the building make this pretty attractive, we think. Perhaps there’s a bit of a discount for the fact that it’s a three-family–most buyers in the North Slope these days probably want a one- or two-family. In addition to the cost the reconfigure, the listing admits that the house needs a tune-up in places. Personally, we’d start by plastering over that brick wall in the bedroom! Regardless, we suspect this will attract a buyer quite quickly at this price. It makes us wonder: If this house is $1.8 in the prime Slope, what would it be in Fort Greene?
North Slope 3-Family [NY Times]
Listing #5230 [Warren Lewis] GMAP P*Shark
Anonymous 01:25 PM said:”the value of living in Park Slope is higher than that of Fort Greene”
I must defend!
Fort Greene:
1)Diversity, Diversity, Diversity
2)Cozy, community vibe
2)Child friendly, but no Bugaboo gridlock
3)Wide leafy streets
3)The Park
4)Pratt
5)BAM
Not that this is a contest or anything ;)I’m just a proud Fort Greener!
Aren’t “the buyer” and his/her detractors basically agreeing?
They all seem to say that FG is priced less than PS, but is catching up in price.
I think the point the buyer was making is that, even at whatever discount, Fort Greene is relatively overpriced, because in PS you are asked to pay for changes to the neighborhood that have already occurred, and in FG you are being asked to pay for changes that are yet to come.
I’m not sure if that’s necessarily trus of Fort Greene, which has transformed a lot in the past decade. I do think it’s true as a rule in (formerly) less expensive neighborhoods around Brooklyn in general.
The most expensive nabes–PS, Cobble Hill, Heights–have gone up until they seem to have hit their ceilings. As that’s happened, it’s created a huge group of priced-out buyers. Which in turn has enabled brokers/sellers to eliminate the “pioneer discount” for various neighborhoods. You pay as if it’s 5 or 10 years into a better future.
IMHO, for that reason, right now, the most expensive neighborhoods and blocks are the best value — if you have the money. The less you spend, the less value you get.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I think that’s where the real argument is, not whether FG is cheaper than prime Slope.
I too am a “pioneer” who chose Clinton Hill over the slope when it came time to buy last fall–though I considered both and would feel privileged to live in either. Two lovely neighborhoods with much to recommend them–I’ve rented for years in the slope–but for many reasons (some already mentioned above), others more a matter of personal taste (I would not be one to find happiness in Midtown Manhattan), chose the former. Six months later, I couldn’t be happier with my decision. It’s really a great community. And if I’m not mistaken, many people are in fact choosing this area to raise their kids. If only I had been a true pioneer–I would have saved a lot of $!
Well it sure look purdy. Don’t think it sounds too cheap for the location though, so I’m not too sure if this is a sign of a price reduction trend. Who knows, I’m not going anywhere for several years at least, we’ll see.
What this listing is about is that prices are decreasing–first in fringe areas and now on the fringes of prime areas. This owner and/or realtor have chosen to price accordingly, rather than pricing it too high and having it sit for ever.
Friends of ours just had their prime slope bstone appraised and the realtor told them sale prices had dropped 10-15% in the last few months (depending on house and location), but that they reccomended pricing it high in the hopes that ignorant buyers would jump on it.
“I just think that the prospective buyer is wrong to think that FG property costs as much as prime PS property.”
No. That’s not what I said. I said, actually, the reverse. Initially, what I said was, “As far as the brownstone in question, I would say that if something is $1.8MM in prime Slope, it should cap out at $1.3MM – $1.4MM in Fort Greene.”
I didn’t check out the property initially: Mr. B. said it was prime Slope so I extrapolated that, if something was $1.8 in prime Slope, it should be substantially less in Fort Greene. Then all the “experts” jumped all over me and said that I was behind the times and that I should check the comps to find out that FG was selling for nearly as much for as PS. To which I replied, it may be, but it shouldn’t.
Park Slope is worth the same as Fort Greene. Park Slope is worth more than Fort Greene. Fort Greene is better than Park Slope. Whatever. Ya’ll shop around at your valuations; I’ll shop at mine.
oh cool! Did I pass?
You’re dreaming if you think FG is going to have some big price drop relative to Park Slope in my opinion. I’m not talking the entire brownstone market, I’m talking FG vs. Park Slope. There are no amenities seriously lacking in FG really, especially considering how tiny of a neighborhood it is.
And they should not be a steal considering how nice the housing stock and neighborhood is. I just think that the prospective buyer is wrong to think that FG property costs as much as prime PS property. PS is a huge area with some prime and some not so prime areas. FG (and Clinton hill for that matter) are much smaller neighborhoods. Each area has price variations depending on location (prime vs not as prime) but there is more variation in the Slope because its currently accepted boundaries are so big.