House of the Day: 370 Clinton Street
A victim of the downturn? Given the timing and circumstances of this new listing at 370 Clinton Street in Cobble Hill, it sounds like the seller is in trouble. She closed on the 6,000-square-foot house last September for $2,650,000 and in the last four months has gutted the interior and commissioned complete architectural drawings for…
A victim of the downturn? Given the timing and circumstances of this new listing at 370 Clinton Street in Cobble Hill, it sounds like the seller is in trouble. She closed on the 6,000-square-foot house last September for $2,650,000 and in the last four months has gutted the interior and commissioned complete architectural drawings for a planned make-over. The plans are part of the package for anyone willing to come up with the asking price of $2,995,000. It is a pretty exciting opportunity for someone who wants to create a living space from scratch: great location, beautiful shell. The only question: Price.
370 Clinton Street [Corcoran] GMAP P*Shark
By the way, this building is not gutted yet. It is being gutted this very moment. There’s a dumpster outside and guys have been filling it all this week.
So you’re 0 for 3, Sam.
1. Average size of home in U.S. is not 3000 sf, it’s closer to 2500. (2479 in 2007)
2. New York City does not have the lowest carbon footprint of any U.S. city. It’s #4.
3. It would appear that the trend towards larger homes is being reversed, in direct opposition to your claim.
But I’m the brick wall.
“The American dream is shrinking as economic and social shifts prompt interest in smaller houses.
“We’re trending toward smaller homes,” says Gopal Ahluwalia, director of research for the National Association of Home Builders. He says growth in the average size of new single-family homes, which went from 1,750 square feet in 1978 to 2,479 in 2007, is starting to reverse.”
http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/
article/20090108/NEWS01/901080387/1002/NEWS01
Such a drama queen too, Sam.
Where exactly did I say I hope you “die”
Martyr much?
Personally, I’m happy that the world is becoming more eco-friendly. I see no reason why that would be considered a negative goal.
Care to comment at all on your assertion that NYC has the lowest carbon footprint in the country, when I clearly showed that you were wrong? Or do you want to continue throwing insults to show just how unaware and uninformed you really are?
I say it again, your anecdotes show your age and I’m sincerely glad that that the younger generation of this country care more about the planet than you do.
I think you’re the brick wall 11217. as indoctrinated in your dogma as the Mao youth of my youth.
Instead of waving a little red book you’re waving a little green one and hoping that those who disagree with you die. nice.
Smaller housing is not marching backwards, Sam. Life is about quality, not quantity.
I’m very glad the future of this planet doesn’t lie in your hands. Your viewpoints on this subject are downright scary.
I’m also confused how I put an article up here stating that New York’s carbon footprint is in fact not first in the nation as he says, but 4th, yet he thinks he knows better than the scientists who actually do the rankings.
I’m not saying everything one reads is the gospel, but he really doesn’t even listen, much less read the articles apparently.
It’s like talking to a brick wall.
Believe me, the average size new home for middle-class families is not shrinking. Even in NYC (home of the 150 square foot studio) the trend is to combine units and to return sub-divided rowhouses into one and two family residences. I know you want us, as a society, to march backwards 11217, but I don’t think it is something most Americans are willing to do if they can possibly help it.