Sold in a Day: Bidding War in Midwood Park
Did anyone else notice this Victorian gem in the Residential Sales feature of The Times yesterday? What particularly grabbed our attention was that the house sold for $20,000 over the asking price in one week. When we tracked down the listing for the 95-year-old house on Mary Kay Gallagher’s site (which, by the way, is…
Did anyone else notice this Victorian gem in the Residential Sales feature of The Times yesterday? What particularly grabbed our attention was that the house sold for $20,000 over the asking price in one week. When we tracked down the listing for the 95-year-old house on Mary Kay Gallagher’s site (which, by the way, is one of the few brokerage site’s that gives the public full transparency on recent sales), we learned that in fact it had sold in one day! Of course $1,020,000 is peanuts compared to the $2.2 million asking price for the house Mary Kay was showing yesterday (see Friday’s Open House Picks)…Did anyone make it by the open house? We were busy at our own place, measuring doorways and figuring out where to run speaker wire.
Residential Sales [NY Times]
636 East 19th Street [Mary Kay Gallagher]
I grew up in Park Slope and Midwood Park. We had no money and were basically forced out of both neighborhoods eventually. The fact that this entire amazing and magical borough is slowly (or not so slowly) being handed over to the rich is very very very sad. These prices are insane.
Mary Kay Gallagher calls it move in condition, which is very different from mint condition.
Linus,
I absolutely agree with your theory when the renovations are priced in to the listing price, but I think Jim was arguing that the two houses in prospect park south listed at 1.395 that need lots of work are good deals comparatively with this house that sold at $1.02 m in mint condition in Midwood Park. IMO, paying 1.395 and putting another 200-400K is overpaying given that last year houses on these blocks were selling at 975k (renovated).
“Oh yes, I see your point – I would much rather rip off and rebuild the roof…”
Sorry, but I think the other anon makes a very good point, at least as far as value is concerned. If a house needs structural work, a roof, upgraded electrical, etc., these necessary physical improvements are probably going to be reflected in the price. Whereas if a house is well-maintained — but happens to be hideous — in this market it’s going to be priced as a move-in condition house. So you’ll pay a “mint” price for a house that you will still need to sink plenty of $$$ into — or you’ll pay mint price and have to learn to live with decor you hate.
I, in fact, would rather put on a new roof, etc. I followed that path with both my co-op and my house — buying absolute fixer-uppers that couldn’t be lived in without work — and thereby got both of them for a cost (including renovations) far less than they would have been in mint condition, and at the end I not only had a deal, but I had exactly the kind of interior and aesthetic I wanted. And I passed on perfectly nice, MIC places because I couldn’t bear to live with the former owner’s aesthetic.
Now I know that not everyone wants to go through renovation hell like I did. But there’s not need to get all snippy on the other anon for simply noting that, when you get a fixer-upper, at the end of the ordeal, you’ll end up with something made just the way you want it.
(Incidentally, this has nothing to do with brownstone vs. Victorian Brooklyn. The same principle applies anywhere.)
This house is not in Midwood. It is in Midwood Park, which is part of Victorian Flatbush.
The new generation of buyers in Victorian Flatbush are chosing the neighborhood over the suburbs, not over the Slope. Many come directly from Manhattan. They tend to be affluent, and can afford to renovate and maintain their beautiful homes without relying on a rental to swing it.
Brownstone Brooklyn is beautiful, but I do detect a touch of the green-eyed monster in many of the posts on this site.
Who is Big Bubba? She seems like a contrarian!
Oh yes, I see your point – I would much rather rip off and rebuild the roof, upgrade plumbing and electrical systems, replace rotted, moldy beams, repoint the outside and reshingle the house than rip out some ugly carpeting and repaint the interior. By the way – I did not see that particular Midwood house, but the houses in Midwood tend to be in pretty good condition. Knowing people whose families have lived in Midwood for years, I can tell you that the area is much more solidly middle and upper middle class and people generally had the money to maintain their houses properly, even if their choice of wall paper wasn’t so great. Wall paper is an easy fix.
Have any of you actually been in this house? How do you know it’s mint? I admit, it looks well maintained, but what do you actually KNOW about it? On a lesser note, the decor, to my taste is rather dicey. I would be forking out a lot of cash to redecorate. Better a house that needs work, then one that just doesn’t appeal. Also, it should be noted that, architecturally speaking this house, while attractive, is nothing special for the Victorian Flatbush neighborhood.
This house looks to be in infinately better condition that the other $1.395MM house from a couple weeks ago.
Also, despite being further from Park Slope, I perceive Ditmas to bea more established nabe. I could see paying the $1.02MM for something that is mint.