House of the Day: 227 Berkeley Place
We were wondering why the price tag on this Berkeley Place house was only $2,799,000. Then we got to the part in the description about the single rent controlled stabilized tenant in a studio on the top floor. Losing the half-floor of space is less of a bummer than the fact that you have to…
We were wondering why the price tag on this Berkeley Place house was only $2,799,000. Then we got to the part in the description about the single rent controlled stabilized tenant in a studio on the top floor. Losing the half-floor of space is less of a bummer than the fact that you have to keep the entire stairwell public. Then again, that’s why this place (which has some pretty kick-ass plaster and woodwork) isn’t priced in the mid-threes. It’s a tricky situation though: Most folks with $2.8 million to spend don’t want to be bothered with this kind of thing. Clearly the tenant doesn’t want to bought out or the current owners would have done so before putting the house on the market.
277 Berkeley Place [Corcoran] GMAP P*Shark
Photo by Kate Leonova for Property Shark
Buying a luxury home at this price with a protected tenant upstairs certainly makes no sense. However, someone could buy it as a small apatment building for the income stream. Perhaps in five or more years the rent-protected tenant could die, at which time the place could be resold as a single family or as whatever brings in the most.
As long as the financial markets continue to do very well, prices for the best blocks will continue to be incredibly high.
…other than rich folks in finance dumping their loot so they can brag to their friends about their flower gardens, moldings, and sunrooms.
huh, as opposed to rich people bragging about their 20 unit buildings in Manhattan and their brilliant business acumen on cap rates on blogs.
Fact: If the rent stabilized tenant is over 62, you can’t get rid of them, even if you’re going to use the entire house as your own residence. So, get used to your own personal bum living upstairs . . . Stinky ain’t going nowhere!
I can’t believe how high prices are for townhouses in Brooklyn. I purchased 20 unit multifamily apartment buildings in prime Manhattan just ten years ago for way less than single family houses in Brooklyn go for today.
I bought because the cap rates made sense. Why the hell would anyone pay current prices? They’re totally nuts.
The only reason to buy in Brooklyn
today is if you’re rich and don’t give a damn.
You folks are dreaming if you think prices like these will hold up for the next couple years. There’s no justification for this malarky other than rich folks in finance dumping their loot so they can brag to their friends about their flower gardens, moldings, and sunrooms.
2:51 — I own in Windsor & enjoy this site tremendously. However, there are times when I look at the prices on this site and can’t help feeling ill when I see “we think this house is a steal” and the steal price is 2M ++. I **think** that’s what 2:38 was saying.
**Sigh** On the one hand, it’s great for Brooklyn on the one hand, but on the other side, it’s only good for a certain kind of Brooklyn and that’s just kinda sad.
Thank you 3:20, very well done.
The property is being sold as a mutiple dwelling, the rent roll is probably not bad. Mystery solved.
I did not see the house, but live in PS. My guess is that the stabilized apt is probably pretty close to market rent anyhow (as many of the stabilized apts in PS are), and if the owner wanted to convert the entire building to single-family, they probably could after a couple of years of court proceedings under the guise that they need the apt for themselves. In general, small-building live-in owners are given more leeway on evictions than larger professional landlords. The exception being if the tenant is elderly or disabled (then nothing save death can get them out).
I think the assumption that the RS tenant is a problem tenant is premature. There are 4 tenant-occupied studios in the building – one of them happens to be stabilized.
IMO, the huge price discount reflects a couple of issues:
1) With 4 units, this looks and feels more like an investment property than an owner-occupied situation. Invmnt prop’s always go for less in this mkt – its a different buyer mindset.
2) Also, with 4-units, I bet taxes are hefty, as this will fall into a very different property tax code than 1-2 fam homes.
3) In order to convert to a suitable 1-2 fam home, a substantial level of renovation would be required. This adds to the headache factor.
4) And last, but not least, the hassle required to deal with a stabilized tenant, whether friendly or not, places a significant discount on the property.
Doesn’t $2.799 sound a bit high for this house? I recall that a similar house on St. John’s between 7th and 8th sold for about $2.5 or $2.4 within the last month or so. It was set up as a triplex with garden rental and presumably did not have the rent stabilized tenant complication.
Doesn’t $2.799 sound a bit high for this house? I recall that a similar house on St. John’s between 7th and 8th sold for about $2.5 or $2.4 within the last month or so. It was set up as a triplex with garden rental and presumably did not have the rent stabilized tenant complication.
Doesn’t $2.799 sound a bit high for this house? I recall that a similar house on St. John’s between 7th and 8th sold for about $2.5 or $2.4 within the last month or so. It was set up as a triplex with garden rental and presumably did not have the rent stabilized tenant complication.