One Hanson Place just went rental

Not surprised. Although they did an amazing job with the bldg., they can't do anything about the types of people one sees once outside of the bldg.

The finishes were very nice, and I really liked the idea of having the concierge service dedicated to the top-floor residents--but I just couldn't deal with the prospect of seeing "those people" around the bldg. day in and day out (I am being totally classist-racist-xenophobic here).

What kind of people are you talking about?

One Hanson is a dump. They could have done far better with that beautiful old building. The units are typical cookie-cutter style; cramped rooms, flimsy-walled, crappy-veneer-floored stinkers that really have nothing going for them but view. Some don't even get much of that.

Plus, the stalled Atlantic Yards project hasn't helped their prospects. The whole area is a depressing eyesore.

Oh, it's you again, aimeehart... Well, I am talking about groups of people that would make you feel totally classist-racist-xenophobic when you feel as though you wouldn't want them in your neighborhood. The feeling is kind of similar to what many of us experienced upon hearing what happened the other day on AirTran.

However, I should point out that the area has long been "their neighborhood," so I am not in the position to complain about their presence there. I'd simply choose to live elsewhere. I am all for equal rights.

------
Squid: Dump? Cookie-cutter? Cramped? ...at One Hanson? Are you sure you have the right bldg.? None of the units I saw there fits those descriptions (I saw mostly on the top floors, with might explain the unique layouts and large rooms). I thought the architect did an amazing job, and the finishes were very nice... By far the best development I saw in Brooklyn. I however agree with you that the entire AREA is a depressing eyesore.

Why would anyone buy when you can rent for $4,500 what it could cost $9,000 to buy?

Makes no sense. 50% drop.

nyc212 -- Well, in fairness, when we visited most of the higher floors were still hard-hat areas. But the units we did see were surprisingly boring with small (yes) bedrooms, rather uninspired living areas, and overall shoddy-looking materials and workmanship. Typical stuff one sees in standard new construction where corners are routinely cut quality-wise. We weren't impressed.

nyc212 is right. There's a lot of shady and undesirable people who live in that area. It's near a big housing project. Why would anyone want to spend that kind of money to live in a building where once you step outside, you are confronted by bums and thugs?

nyc212, do you think that admitting that you are racist makes it acceptable? i am kind of amazed by this. 'their' neighborhood? and then we get quantum with the 'undesirable people.' we are not talking about a building in a dangerous area--it's around the corner from BAM for godssake. if you don't like black people you should probably keep that charming attitude to yourself.

there are housing projects all over new york city. if you don't want to live near them, move to the suburbs.

When will NYC get rid of the housing projects, like the other cities have done? It nearly impossible to find a nice building in a nice area that's safe and clean.

And no, it's not about race. There's bums and thugs of all races.

excuse me, quantum. nyc212 ADMITTED that he was being racist. so yes, it is about race.

and by the way, you could not be more wrong. NYC is the safest large city in the united states. other cities can barely dream about crime rates as low as nyc's. you can't find safe neighborhoods in nyc? and you attribute that to housing projects? this makes no sense.

wait. you aren't defending his viewpoint? or you are defending it? you can't say that you aren't defending it and then go on to defend it. if you are going to be an elitist, at least don't be a moron. morons are usually not part of the elite.

I personally don't hold nyc's viewpoint. I'm just saying that I see where he's coming from.

Anyone who's willing to spend that kind of money in a shitty area like fort greene is a fucking moron.

and what makes ft greene shitty is what, exactly?
high crime? no. it is a low crime area.
no culture? no. it is the home of BAM.
ugly buildings? no. it has some of the most beautiful 19th century architecture in the city.
poor amenities? no services? high traffic? no, no, no.

i don't plan to move to ft. greene, but it is a wonderful neighborhood. and anyone who defends a racist and sees where he's coming from is either racist himself or, yes, a moron. well, being racist is moronic so i guess we are back to the moron option.

Why are you shocked that One Hanson place a rental? Is it because now is the time to buy?

I just looked at this unit's floorplan - - http://www.halstead.com/detail.aspx?id=1615073

a 1-bedroom for $2500. I'm sorry, but you can totally get this in new-ish construction (built within last 5 years) in non-prime Manhattan (think FiDi, far west side/Hell's kitchen). Bedroom size is just unacceptably small (less than 9-1/2 feet wide) for anything but an otherwise perfect building and location.

So, neighborhood/schmeighborhood, the value proposition and pricing are just wrong. That's the central problem.

More wishful thinking from sellers/developers.

Now, $2,500 for a TWO-bedroom like this, and we might be able to talk.

I haven't read through this entire thread, but nyc212, you sound like a complete idiot.

Fort Green is certainly not my cup of tea, but you sound like a classless buffoon.

Only partially rental. It is a very good building.

Housing projects combined with rent control - the biggest mistakes ever made negatively impacting the profile of nyc residents.

Wonder if these will ever go away..

Just had a thought ... now that One Hanson is a rental building, is this broker charging a fee?

I bought in this building, so no surprise I don't agree with many of the criticisms listed here.

Most of those criticisms are subjective - things like finish quality, layout and (my personal fave) the wrong 'type' of people - so we can agree to disagree.

However I think the problem of proximity to housing projects, which has gotten the most attention, is actually a mistake.

There are several new projects along the Flatbush Ave corridor that are quite close to projects - Oro and Toren are some examples. I think whoever added the projects to their list of One Hanson negatives was confusing it with one of those, since I've gotten to know this area really well, and there are no projects in the immediate area.

The location certainly has its problems. We get Flatbush Ave noise, are across the street from the Atlantic Mall, and only one additional block away from the Atlantic Yards - which if they ever get around to building anything there could become another problem.

But overall, location is actually the main reason I bought here. The Atlantic Mall is also home to 10 subway lines and the LIRR, which makes getting anywhere in NYC (inc. JFK) a breeze. Proximity to Prospect Park, Downtown Brooklyn, and the best parts of both Park Slope and Fort Greene sealed the deal for me.

So criticize away, but please keep it real...

"a 1-bedroom for $2500. I'm sorry, but you can totally get this in new-ish construction (built within last 5 years) in non-prime Manhattan (think FiDi, far west side/Hell's kitchen). Bedroom size is just unacceptably small (less than 9-1/2 feet wide) for anything but an otherwise perfect building and location."

Not quite.

$2500 gets you a cheaper studio at 20 pine. Sizes are ok, but layouts weird, good finished.
But, remember, its Fidi, the building is still under construction, and the amenities are not finished yet.

DUMBO rentals start at $3k, so $2500 is not really that crazy.

This is back to "American Studies 101" for me--and I am the "idiot," eh? I don't really want to dignify some of the ridiculous replies with a response, but it's Sunday and I got some time to kill...

Please don't confuse "color blindness" with being non-racist. <-- If you know what I mean by this, thanks! You are as culturally informed as I am, and you must have understood my original point--which I myself characterized as "racist/classist/xenophobic" but is actually far from it. I was being sarcastic. More importantly, please don't try to tease apart race with class.

If you think characterizing Ft. Greene as being "their neighborhood" is a racist comment, my freinds, you are typical Brooklyn-transplants whom we make fun of because you think you are so egalitarian yet your action only screams colonialism.

Prada_Addict is probably a White guy who thinks he is the most liberal of all people because he's, well, gay--yet his handle name say it all (he's what we call a limousine liberal, who firmly believes that s/he is completely free of all social biases yet, all they do is hand out charities out of their limos at their leisure--wearing their Pradas). Also, happyrenter gets the "Malicious Misquoting Award" for 2009, so early in the year. howie simply doesn't know how to read, it seems.

Many of you are just a bunch of hypocrites. I don't want to pay $1.5 mil to live in the area full of people lower than upper-middle-class, no matter how hardworking and non-violent they may be. If you genuinely feel otherwise, good for you. I don't think your attitude is all that typical here or anywhere.

NYC sealed its doom by building too many housing projects near prime real estate and then exacerbating it with rent control. I hope the city revisits these failed policies, but I doubt it.

quantum
20 minutes ago
ignore this person
report abuse
NYC sealed its doom by building too many housing projects near prime real estate and then exacerbating it with rent control. I hope the city revisits these failed policies, but I doubt it.

Rufus?

projects_suck
about 2 hours ago
ignore this person
report abuse
Housing projects combined with rent control - the biggest mistakes ever made negatively impacting the profile of nyc residents.

Wonder if these will ever go away..

And more Rufus? Sheesh how many names do you have on here like two dozen?

"NYC sealed its doom by building too many housing projects near prime real estate and then exacerbating it with rent control. I hope the city revisits these failed policies, but I doubt it."

What's funny is, that isn't the case at all.

The housing projects were built far from the good real estate. Way high uptown, on the far west side, etc... not near prime 5th ave in the 60s/70s/80s. Not near prime 5th avenue downtown. Not in the west village, etc,etc.

What happened is, so many people demanded to live in prime manhattan that basically prime manhattan expanded... .closer and close to the projects. Those used to be considered "marginal" neighborhoods.

But too many people want to live in NYC, so they gentrified those areas as well.

Good thing Chicago doesn't have that problem... no one wants to live there.

nyc10022, what are you talking about? There's projects in lincoln center, chelsea, and west village.

>> I said: "a 1-bedroom for $2500. I'm sorry, but you can totally get this in new-ish construction (built within last 5 years) in non-prime Manhattan (think FiDi, far west side/Hell's kitchen). Bedroom size is just unacceptably small (less than 9-1/2 feet wide) for anything but an otherwise perfect building and location."

>> nyc10022 said: "Not quite.

>> $2500 gets you a cheaper studio at 20 pine. Sizes are ok, but layouts weird, good finished.
But, remember, its Fidi, the building is still under construction, and the amenities are not finished yet."

To nyc10022: Whoa, hello? Don't think you've been paying close attention to what's happening in the (remember, I said) non-prime parts of manhattan.

My apologies for the temporal nature of these links, as they won't last once the units get taken.

Here's an example of $2500 or below:
http://www.brodskyorg.com/apt_detail.cfm?ID=694

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/441262-condo-516-west-47th-street-clinton-new-york

[contined on next posting]

I should acknowledge, though, that getting nominal rents at $2500 or below is still a ways off. The unit above is in a building that specifically doesn't offer free month's rents, they just lower the listing rent. On an effective basis ($2700 with 1 month free is about $2500/mo over 13 mos), you can see a lot more stuff.

http://www.urbansherpany.com/ApartmentDetail/11307/45_Wall_Street/Rockrose_Development_Corp

http://www.nybits.com/apartmentlistings/cfce0f48d77289585a435b3fdc1ec090.html [floorplan lacks measurements, but I know the bldg, BRs are at least 11' wide, vs the 9.5' in the Hanson example I showed above]

Thanks for proving the point, rufus.

Lincoln center was built on what was formerly some of the most crime-ridden blocks in the city. Remember West Side Story? That was the west 50/60s. They put lincoln center there to help "fix" it. Columbus Circle was also a dump.... it had the NY Coliseum on it, and was definitely crappy. Trump Tower was formerly an office building (gulf and western). This was not a particularly nice spot to live for a while. The UWS in general was not as nice as the UES, but even its nice parts were further uptown. And those projects were built even before that... when there were gangs in the neighborhood (westies!)

As for chelsea, it only became a hot neighborhood after the galleries moved in when they got price out of soho. It was one of the chepest neighborhoods in Manhattan south of 96th even through the 80s. Before that, it was not a particularly nice spot. It was gentrified significantly. That you are calling it prime manhattan now just shows how little of the history you know. And many of the "projects" are really only co-ops (penn south houses).

What W village projects are you talking about?

So this "was" the case before. Now that these areas are no longer "crime-ridden" and highly desirable for some, what would it take to move the projects outta there (or even better out of the city)

Ft. Green..why would anyone even think about living there...the people that live there probably don't want to.

nyc212,
you just said "Please don't confuse "color blindness" with being non-racist." fine. but you yourself said "I am being totally classist-racist-xenophobic here." so forgive me for assuming that you were being racist when you yourself described yourself as racist. i called you on your own, admitted racism. it's unacceptable, stupid, crass, and classless whether you admit that you are a bigot or deny it.

"So this "was" the case before. Now that these areas are no longer "crime-ridden" and highly desirable for some, what would it take to move the projects outta there (or even better out of the city)"

Step 1, we get the rest of the poor people to move to Chicago....

Actually there ARE projects in Chelsea, the Fulton Houses on 9th-10th Avenue in the teens and the Elliott Houses in the 20s. I grew up with kids from both and they were the same as just about everyone else in the neighborhood, including the West Village, at the time...working to lower middle class. When the projects were initially built they were populated largely with working families with upwardly mobile aspirations and they did not carry they stigma of crime and public dependency with which we look at the projects today. As the sourrounding areas grew more upscale, the projects went in the opposite direction. The solution is not to get rid of the projects but strive to make them safer and less of a trap for multi-generational dependence.

Oh and by the way Rufus or whatever you are calling yourself today, rent CONTROL was eliminated a long, long time ago. Anyone who has a rent controlled apartment has either been in residence prior to 1971 or who shared residence with a pre-1971 tenant and assumed rights upon their demise.

The housing projects in chelsea and lincoln center are dangerous and a complete eyesore. It's the reason why the "luxury" condos in that area, such as loft 25, onyx, element, adagio, etc., are having a tough time selling. Who want to spend $1.5 million to live next to projects and be awakened by gunshots and police sirens at night?

Of course, Chicago got rid of housing projects like cabrini green, which were near prime real estate. But NYC is years behind Chicago in virtually every aspect of urban development.

"The solution is not to get rid of the projects but strive to make them safer and less of a trap for multi-generational dependence"

That sounds like propaganda...
When was the last time you walked around one of the affected areas (e.g. ~65th, west of A'dam) after dark?

Bottom line - projects are an expesive failiure. Unfortunately dont see enough will to get rid of them as politicians will always rather get more votes, than to do the right things for the city.

projects_suck, I agree entirely. The liberal politicans who run this city are cowards. The projects in chelsea and lincoln center are extremely dangerous and hurt the city's growth.

"Actually there ARE projects in Chelsea, the Fulton Houses on 9th-10th Avenue in the teens and the Elliott Houses in the 20s."

Did anyone say otherwise?

"CONTROL was eliminated a long, long time ago"

But rufus gets his NYC information off tv... where there is TONS of "rent control".

"Of course, Chicago got rid of housing projects like cabrini green, which were near prime real estate."

Funny, cause there are still people living in Cabrina Green. And I went by, that neighborhood SUCKS. My friends were afraid to get out of the limo to hit the red hots place the driver suggested.

"The projects in chelsea and lincoln center are extremely dangerous and hurt the city's growth. "

They're safer than the nicest parts of Chicago.

Then again, I guess that explains why Chicago HAS no growth. People are leaving the city, and the residents still left are poorer and poorer.

rufus
about 1 hour ago
ignore this person
report abuse
projects_suck, I agree entirely. The liberal politicans who run this city are cowards. The projects in chelsea and lincoln center are extremely dangerous and hurt the city's growth.

There he goes agreeing with himself again. I have to admit, I kind of enjoy watching Rufus converse with himself on here.

And many of the "projects" are really only co-ops (penn south houses). That was your comment nyc10022 but I think we agree on the total waste of cyberspace known as rufus and his various, endless collection of screen names. I must question however, what makes you think a "fat chick" would want anything to do with him. As a female who will never be able to write Super model under occupation, I can assure you that conversation with rufus would not be on my agenda.

"DUMBO rentals start at $3k, so $2500 is not really that crazy."

Isn't it crazy that DUMBO rentals start at 3000?

Part of it is that there aren't really small crappy (legal) rentals in DUMBO. I believe there were basically no legal apartments just a few years ago, so everything is new construction or conversion. Also, not that many tiny apartments either...

A better comparison might be 110 livingston. Ok building, tried to sell, ended up having to rent out units. I believe those also start at 3 or so. A 1 bedroom is currently going for $3400.

So $2500 for Hanson isn't really that high...

look, there are plenty of problems with housing projects, but it is absolutely ridiculous to try to argue that they are somehow a major threat to the city. i particularly object to the general idea that they are a threat when near high-end real estate. what, all poor people should be mashed together on the outer edges of the city? new york city is the safest large city in the united states by a large margin. the neighborhoods that you say are threatened by dangerous projects, such as the UWS and Chelsea, are in fact very safe areas. And the so-called liberals who run the city must be the last two mayors: Rudolf Giuliani (a Republican prosecutor) and Michael Bloomberg (an independent entrepreneur).

promoting the development of high end real estate is not the number one purpose for our city.

>>new york city is the safest large city in the united states by a large margin.<<

Not to go all Rufus on you, but watch that margin narrow considerably as budget cuts kick in and services are scaled back. Areas we consider prime now (ie UWS above 86th) were downright dangerous 30 years ago. It is entirely possible things could slide again, though god willing not to the level of the mid-70s.

Any updates on this building? Prices don't seem to have moved down.

price chopper

They have a unit listed at 262K now. Wonder what that's about.

thats reality

Hmmmm. But it is STILL over $700 pf, even w/ the 30% price chop.
Sure, the finishes are VERY nice, but the area isn't...

(This is where some Brooklyn lovers will reply: "What do you mean? Fort Greene is the bestest neighborhood of all.")

I agree Fort Greene is still a fringe hood, Prices here will most likely keep going down

It's hilarious to me that the one-beds in this place are more than half a million.

Why would anyone pay $2500 to live in Fort Greene???

I suppose it's technically Fort Greene, but the look and feel is anything but traditional Fort Greene (quiet streets, Italianate brownstones, the park, ethnic restaurants, etc.). The appeal (to some) is that it's roughly at the intersections of so many neighborhoods (downtown, Fort Greene, Boerum Hill, Prospect Heights, Park Slope are all right there) and has great transportation access. I haven't seen the interiors, but it's a standout building for obvious reasons, and as others have said, the rents are pretty much in line. It's not for everyone, but I don't get some of the complaints.

I understand the complaints about the small rooms. The apartments feel very cramped for the better part of a million dollars in a marginal neighborhood in Brooklyn.

i agree nycmatt et. al. that the apartments i've seen seemed very cramped - i can't exactly explain it - but 800sqft at 1 hanson just didn't seem like 800sqft at other condos i've seen - and i'm sure they're exaggerating the size as well.

also, fort greene is definitely not 'fringe', and i think there are enough people that love fort greene that it has a broader base of buyers than areas more accurately called 'fringe' (i.e. clinton hill/bed-stuy border, prospect heights/crown heights border) that said, bjw2103 is absolutely right to point out that 1 hanson's location does not really provide all of the things that attract people to the neighborhood. it's got great transportation - but the atlantic terminal area is pretty grim aesthetically, and loud, and not neighborhood-y.

i actually really like the building, but it was overpriced, so the chops make sense.

Why was this building on the recent list of distressed central Brooklyn condos when building like the Oro and Toren aren't? Aren't they 70+% occupied?

It could be another case of the developer lying to get deals done. One thing is for sure is that you cant trust what they tell you.

HH11231

Toren is also on the list!

see 150 Myrtle

re the distressed condo list - as per the nytimes local blog that originally reported it. it was, in fact, not a list of distressed condos - that was an error in the original post - just a list of recent condos in hakeem jeffries district that have not yet sold out. 1 hanson may be price chopping, but i don't think it qualifies as distressed.

Huff get the facts straight. Crains reported it and they are standing by it. There is no way for the developers to spin the facts.

hey not saying that a lot of these condos aren't probably distressed. but i don't think i've got the facts wrong here. crains originally ran the story, and the local got the list and published it. both implied that it was a list of distressed condos. the local then talked to someone in jeffries office and confirmed it was not a list of distressed condos. here's the link for the whole story:

http://fort-greene.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/27/a-gleaming-landscape-of-debt/

and yes Fort Greene is fringe!

Huff it was a Crains article that got picked up by the blogs. I dont care if some blog is changing the original story. Crains is sticking with the story. If Crains ran a correction then I would listen. They have not.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/14196-65-central-brooklyn-condos-in-or-near-financial-distress-

samadams: http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20090827/FREE/908279977/1059

although i am surprised that nytimes blog is not reputable enough for you...at the bottom of the above crain's article you will find your necessary, non-blog correction, which I quote in full below:

CORRECTION: The list of 65 residential buildings included properties that are financially sound but struggling to sell out remaining units. That was misstated in the original article published Aug. 27, 2009.

huff, that is NOT consistent with the NYT's correction. "struggling to sell out remaining units" is not the same as that list represented developements, nothing more, nothing less.

Huff thanks for the link. Something is not right here though.

this is almost an angels on a pinhead type of argument at this point. here is what i said:

" just a list of recent condos in hakeem jeffries district that have not yet sold out."

here is a quote from the nytimes correction:

"A “significant number” of those buildings — but not all of them — are either financially troubled, on the verge of distress, or struggling to sell the remaining units, Mr. Jeffries said this afternoon through his spokeswoman, Lupe Todd."

here is the crains correction again:

"CORRECTION: The list of 65 residential buildings included properties that are financially sound but struggling to sell out remaining units. That was misstated in the original article published Aug. 27, 2009."

at this point the argument is whether 'struggling to sell out' is a quality necessary for inclusion in the list, or merely prevalent among those buildings included in the list. either way, this list represents unsold units in a bad re market in brooklyn - many in areas that are being particularly hard hit by the re crisis. i think crains and the nytimes just reported it with slightly different emphases.

i agree, samadams, that something is strange about the whole thing. my interpretation is that the jeffries people made a list of buildings they thought might be candidates for their affordable housing push. and who really knows exactly what criteria they used to chose them - except for the basic fact that they were not sold out. and now they're trying to make sure they don't get accused of publishing a blacklist of condo buildings and hurting their sales.

Fort Green is NOT fringe.

Also this building DOES straddle the neighborhood borders. It's basically sitting on the largest transportation hub in Brooklyn. It's over priced but then again EVERYTHING in Brooklyn is still overpriced. I've seen the crap they're trying to sell in Park Slope that's 450sq ft and going for 299K and that's with no renovations and calling that a 1 bedroom. Now that's cramped.

You are right Fort Greene is not even safe enough to be Fringe that shit is the ghetto.

samadams: Just let "Fort Green defenders" say whatever they want. Most of us are with you, but they clearly have vested interest in portraying Ft. Greene as the bestest neighborhood--so let them. In another thread, they even deny the existence of the Walt Whitman Houses, one of the LARGEST and toughest housing projects in New York City!

I, for one, would like to report having seen a scary-looking woman attacking another on my way from the Atlantic station to Forte, and their homeless friends did nothing to break them apart.

Some Pratt kid got beaten by a crobar last week in that ghetto. Just down the street they found somebodies body parts in a suitcase. Fort Greene is ghetto

samadams, WE KNOW (although I think it was maybe 3 weeks ago)! Some of us pointed that out in another thread, and they came back w/ some ridiculous excuse which I didn't even bother to retain in my cognitive system.

samadams, I am sure they have some real estate to sell in that area, so let us be kind. We should do our part to stimulate the market, and we shouldn't be interferring w/ their efforts. With this said, yes, I agree with you. But let's not be mean.

You guys crack me up - some "defenders" have no vested interest in Fort Greene (I speak for myself here anyway). It's a fine neighborhood - yes, there are some rougher blocks, especially north of Willoughby, but there are plenty of lovely blocks, and some great housing stock. Is it prime west village? Of course not, but it is definitely not "ghetto," unless you're a supposed self-avowed racist or take yourself to be one of the founding fathers anyway.

Do normal New York type families live here? Or is it a mix/match?

Depends what you mean by normal. My own perspective is the only normal people are the ones you don't know very well.

Please, someone got mugged at gunpoint in Brooklyn Heights just this month on Kane and Hicks. I suppose that makes the Heights ghetto too. I personally have no vested interest in Ft. Green. I don't even live there nor am I'm going to move there, but it's definitely not a ghetto neighborhood.

Sorry scratch that, Cobble Hill another notoriously ghetto neighborhood now.

people this is a train station. it is NOT fort greene. it is flatbush/atlantic/4th avenue intersection. target heights?

We were going to take one of these rentals and the units are great. We then found out there was about $5000 in fees including a $750 NON-REFUNDABLE application fee for the building. What economy do these brokers think they are dealing with?

As for the Ft. Greene is the ghetto crowd I love to hear that talk. Maybe they will stay away and prices will drop.

.

if the Nets/Ratner development gets built (which it sounds like it will), is this good or bad for One Hanson ?