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
I agree Dave. You can do whatever you please.
The entire world isn’t going to “go green” but the more people who do, the better for the planet. That’s all.
I believe you have the right to do what you want, I’m just baffled by Sam’s comments which seem to state that living in anything less than 3000 sf is substandard living.
Nope, Sam.
Just wish you’d listen to something than your own hot air once in a while.
11217…If one is willing to pay for the costs of a bigger carbon footprint they should be able to do so. This is still a democracy and a capitalistic one at that. I’m not denigrating anyone for being more environmentally aware. I’ve got 1,600 sq ft for myself in Brooklyn because I can afford it. I hardly believe that it is too much or that it is wasteful. I shudder to think how many sq ft I have when I take into account other residences.
Why is always about size??
It should be about location in the nation.
Sam, please see my post at 4:31. These numbers are for the U.S. not NYC.
The average size is 2438, down from 2629 and the median is 2,090, down from 2,291
DIBS,
I think 11217 is hoping we drop dead and leave the planet to the truly evolved, like himself.
I have not seen or read about a decrease in the average size of new homes being built in the US.
3,000 s.f. is more or less average, certainly not huge.
If you live in a tight NYC apartment, it’s huge by comparison, (especially if you have always lived in NYC and think it is the normal measure) but comparing typical middle-class American homes and typical middle-class NYC homes is like comparing two different worlds.
Dave,
That sounds like a defense of waste. The green movement is real and in its infancy.
You can choose not to take part or to ignore that it’s happening, but I’m hopeful that our new administration will lead us in the direction that MUST be taken.
There will be stragglers like you and Sam who seem to think that you can’t survive with less than 3000 sf, but hopefully people like you guys will become the minority in the future.
“The average size of homes started in the third quarter of 2008 was 2,438 square feet, down from 2,629 square feet in the second quarter, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Similarly, the median size of homes started in the third quarter was 2,090, down from 2,291. The statistics confirm what the housing industry has suspected for a while.
Builders are responding to those consumer desires. According to the National Association of Home Builders, 88% of builders surveyed in January said that they are building or planning to build a larger share of smaller homes. Eighty-nine percent said they’re planning on building more lower-priced models.”