Flatbush: Bargain Hunters' Paradise?
This weekend’s profile of Flatbush in the Times (which defines the area’s ambiguous boundaries as Ocean Avenue, New York Avenue, Parkside Avenue and Avenue H) characterizes it as a place that’s becoming more attractive to buyers priced out of Manhattan and other parts of Brooklyn. According to a Century 21 broker, prices are hovering around…
This weekend’s profile of Flatbush in the Times (which defines the area’s ambiguous boundaries as Ocean Avenue, New York Avenue, Parkside Avenue and Avenue H) characterizes it as a place that’s becoming more attractive to buyers priced out of Manhattan and other parts of Brooklyn. According to a Century 21 broker, prices are hovering around $120,000 for one-bedrooms, $170,000 to $190,000 for two-bedrooms, $450,000 for one-family houses and $600,000 for two-family houses. Some recent transplants say they’ve also been won over by Flatbush’s diversity and retail offerings (which will soon include a new Target). The area’s primary lure, though, is its affordability. As one investor says, Where else do you find a one-bedroom in the mid-$100s, or if you’re a couple with a couple of kids, a two-bedroom for $200,000? Have any readers snagged a deal they’d care to brag about? What are the nicest old co-op buildings in the area?
Note to City Dwellers: Steals Available Here [NY Times]
Photo by Rob Hoey.
We snapped up a 1000+ sq ft two bedroom condominium in the Ditmas Park neighborhood for $300K. Felt like a good deal at the time. Feels like a fantastic deal to us now that we know the neighborhood a little better.
10:44–Your comment would be accurate except that the article explicitly excludes the Cortelyou Road area from its definition of Flatbush when it makes Ocean Avenue the borderline. The point here is that the article draws a line around what is arguably the most West Indian section of Flatbush and then barely mentions the fact that it is West Indian at all. I do think this article is essentially just a realtor’s puff piece and that they are afraid, justifiably or not, that talking about the West Indian character (i.e. the blackness) of the area will scare potential buyers away.
Several Brooklyn bloggers who actually consider themselves to live in Flatbush have responded to the Times piece in our own ways. See Brooklyn Junction [http://brooklynjunction.blogspot.com/2007/12/did-flatbush-just-get-lot-thinner.html] and Fading Ad Blog [http://fadingad.wordpress.com/2007/12/02/hey-i-live-in-that-rectangle-called-flatbush-brooklyn-junction-on-ny-times/] for examples. I concur with 10:01 and 10:24: my definition of “Flatbush” is MUCH larger than the limited area the Times tries to characterize.
As to the other details within that boundary, I have no opinion or information to offer, since I don’t live within the Times’ “Flatbush.”
Yes, I realize Russians are white. Mea Culpa. Buyt they are a distince ethnic group with their own language and culture. So don’t quite shoot me yet.
Hey 10:24, a story I got from one of my neighbors is that the frequent gunshots near us were the result of a gun salesman in the area. He would go up onto his rooftop across the street and shoot off guns as part of showing potential buyers his wares. For some unknown reason–the gun salesman left the area (busted? moved? who knows?) and poof! no more gunshots. –10:01
Actually, 10:28, I was thinking of the Pakistani, Russian, Asian, Nepali, Latino and, yes, the odd white family. The Victorian Flatbush area is home to Cortelyou Road, which according to US News and World Report is the most ethnically diverse neighborhood in the entire United States. Failure to mention that distinction is as erroneous as to fail to mention the large West Indian population further East of Victorian Flatbush.
Who’s the relexive racist? Hmmmmm…
Yes, guest at 10:18. I think lots of Times readers would be interested in Flatbush, even if it has a “West Indian character.” Such readers are not, by and large, the kinds of reflexive racists that haunt this blog.
I know this by seeing the great increase in young white couples leaving the subway at Church Avenue and heading to their apartments, often carrying a copy of the Times.
Sheesh.
I have lived in Flatbush (barely to the east of the Ocean Avenue boundary the Times uses, but I think that erroneously leaves out “Victorian Flatbush,” whould be in) since 1982. I concur with what 10:01 says.
In my immediate locale, however, I do not see evidence of “gang, drug activity,” that was present 10-15 years ago. This varies with the specific area and has disappeared from my routes with the decrease in crime. A note about “gunshots.” I remember that about 12 years ago one might hear them from time to time in the area. I inquired of the police about them, and they were puzzled, too. They were not associated with any murders, assaults, or muggings, which were not increasing. Just a fad at the time, I guess, and one that has disappeared for more than a decade as far as I know.
I agree, 10:03 bad journalism. But why the omission? It’s actually pretty weird.