House of the Day: 63 North 1st Street
Most of the units at 80 Metropolitan are condominium apartments, but there’s a row of townhouses on North 1st Street that also get to take advantage of the development’s communal services. This one at 63 North 1st Street has had a hard time making up its mind about its asking price: It started out in…
Most of the units at 80 Metropolitan are condominium apartments, but there’s a row of townhouses on North 1st Street that also get to take advantage of the development’s communal services. This one at 63 North 1st Street has had a hard time making up its mind about its asking price: It started out in February 2008 at $1,635,000, and ticked up later in the year to $1,665,000 before getting delisted in July. It reemerged at the depths of the market this winter with a price of $1,295,000, and then a couple of weeks ago got bumped up to $1,400,000. Given that it’s 2,100-square-feet of freshly constructed space, do you think this is achievable?
63 North 1st Street [Halstead] GMAP P*Shark
A swimming pool and parking seem like pretty sweet amenities to me. But imho one of the chief attractions of owning a house is NOT having to deal with condo or coop boards and their common charges/mtn fees. I like to control my own expenses. The other big issue is living in Williamsburg. Love to visit, to shop and eat. But many of the streets are butt ugly and the subway commute is a complete nightmare. Obviously I realize many happy homeowners in that nabe disagree.
Fair enough, the lobby would be a good example. I assume that these townhouses would be able to use the doorman as a package delivery right??
No reason ever to buy a condo/coop if there’s no doorman for mail delivery.
DIBS;
I’m not griping, I’m just advising folks as to what can happen in these situations. Yes, one would think that the folks who buy these units go in with their eyes wide open, but it doesn’t always happen.
As for the amenities that they are shut off from – how about the lobby? Note that these townhouses have thier own private entrance. You think the owners of these townhouses are going to be happy that some of their common charge will go towards maintaining and decorating a lobby that they don’t use?
quote:
I don’t know why they wouldn’t use real photos
because the building itself isnt made for real people.
*rob*
sheesh benson – that sounds like a nightmare.
I’m not understanding the griping by benson and dh on the common charge problem.
First of all, you know what they are going into the purchse.
Second, they are prorated by square footage and if you have more square footage you pay more. Easy to understand.
third: What amenities would any particular owner “be cut off from?”
Fourth: “A lot of amenities that are of no use to you.” You didn’t realize this before purchase?????
“By dirty_hipster on June 3, 2010 1:21 PM
I don’t understand the appeal of these townhouses within condo developments. Seems you’re paying high common charges for amenities you’re cut off from.”
DH;
You said a mouthful there. My condo has exactly the same situation, and boy, does it leave to problems. Further compounding the issue is that in condos’ common charges are based on your share of the total square footage. Since these townhouses are larger, they will have higher common charges.
So, think about it: you pay a higher share of the common charges, alot of which is for amenities that are of no use to you.
This type of situation can easily become divisive. In my condo, these types of owners always try to take control of the Board, and once in, try to minimize any expense or improvement associated with the amenities that are of no concern to them, including things like the elevator and lobby.
I would advise folks to look carefully at your condo’s gvernance in such situations.
New construction!!!! BUYER BEWARE. That giant skylight over the pool is a disaster waiting to happen.
quote:
I don’t know why they wouldn’t use real photos
because the building itself isnt made for real people.
*rob*