House of the Day: 325 East 17th Street
Corcoran must have used an entire case of Pledge shining up the woodwork for the photos of 325 East 17th Street. The Beverley Square East Victorian has lots of original woodwork and inherent charm but the renovation (which must be pretty recent) feels a little overdone to us in places (a 48-inch commercial stove?) and…
Corcoran must have used an entire case of Pledge shining up the woodwork for the photos of 325 East 17th Street. The Beverley Square East Victorian has lots of original woodwork and inherent charm but the renovation (which must be pretty recent) feels a little overdone to us in places (a 48-inch commercial stove?) and lacking in taste in others (what’s up with that fence). It’s like the owner is trying to force an attractive middle-class house and put it on steroids in the hopes of selling it for top dollar. It’ll be interest to see how the asking price of $1,695,000 goes over. This is east of the tracks, after all, a far cry from Westminster or Argyle Road when it comes to property values. There was an open house yesterday—did anyone check it out?
325 East 17th Street [Corcoran] GMAP P*Shark
im a city person and I would never pay 1.6 to live in a house with a yard very far from work. I would just move to the burbs. Or get a new job.
If you want a townhouse in park slope but can’t afford 2-3 million, than you come to ditmas park and get one in the 1-2 range (that’s the discount for not having park slope like amenities). Because as nice as all those amenities are you can still have them in a 5 min drive or be in Tribeca by car in 12 min. I don’t think people are saying if you can afford a house in a place with more amenities you shouldn’t go for it, but for half the price of park slope you get a house. Jersey is whole different ballgame. I think its pretty clear, if you’re a city person than you’ll pretty much live anywhere but the burbs and pay a huge premium to do so.
It is far, that’s true. It’s pretty much like living in the suburbs, except much grittier, and more expensive.
it’s all speculation about what is or isn’t a gamble. i think it’s a gamble personally, but really, how do i know.
i have bought 3x, and each time in an area that was more developed in terms of gentrification, amenities, etc… and, also in closer and more convenient locations, so obviously, i’m not a total pioneer type.
i think that you have to be really comfortable right away with where you live, if so, great. the gamble here is that many people aren’t going to move to an area surrounded by poverty and with not so many amenities, and kinda far for this much money.
You couldn’t really say Ditmas has already gentrified…more like its decline has been arrested. The question to me is, would people who can afford $1.5 mil rather live in North Jersey, where they could find a similar house, and pay 4x the taxes but have better schools? You’re still an hour on average from Midtown.
As for this house, it seems to be in the unfortunate middle zone between “could use a full renovation” and “you could move right in and not change a thing.” I don’t think that appeals to many people.
Fence is good for dogs and kids, though.
I’m 2:41 and I think the 50% comment is a total exageration. But I’d expect a 25% loss–followed by a decade or more of flat prices.
What utter nonsense, 3:03.
houses in this area will be going for 50% of these prices in five years.
I’m not 1:48, but since you asked: At these prices, I’d say the entire neighborhood is a gamble. Same for many other fringe areas. The next few years is going to prove that the prevailing theory that all neighborhoods in Brooklyn will rise was a lie. Redhook is the first to de-gentrify, but it won’t be the last.