Manhattan condos · below 96th $1,600/sf 2%Manhattan co-ops · below 96th $270K/room 2%Central Park perimeterPark Ave $472K/room 18%CPW $355K/room 5%Fifth Ave $501K/room 19%Billionaires' Row $4,313/sf 24%Flatiron $1,769/sf 3%
Full index →
Condominium · 1851
The Landmark at Strong Place
58 Strong Place, Brooklyn, NY 11231
Buildings·Condominium

58 Strong Place (The Landmark at Strong)

58 Strong Place, Brooklyn, NY 11231

Cobble Hill, Brooklyn

BBL 3003237503 · BIN 3003875

At a glance
Year built
1851
Type
Condominium
Units
23
Floors
4
Landmark
No
Board & building profile
Financing
no board approval or down-payment minimum; lender requirements govern. The plan's own purchase agreement required a 10% down payment at contract from sponsor purchasers
Subletting
permitted under the standard condominium framework, subject to the Board's right of first refusal; minimum lease term not documented
Pied-à-terre
permitted (standard condominium)
Pets
permitted; house rule 12 requires animals in public areas to be carried or on a leash

Compiled by The Roebling Research Desk from the building’s offering plan, amendments, and related building documents (primary source dated 2010-10-10 (house rules)). Reported and subject to confirmation. Board policies can change by amendment — confirm at the offer stage.

The Data Room

Every recorded sale at this building, 2011–2025

Price-per-square-foot over time, the line- and floor-premium curves, and every recorded sale.

Median $/sf
$1,445
Listing discount
1.2%
Recorded sales
53
On record
2011–2025
Considering a sale?

Own an apartment here? See what it would sell for.

A Private Pricing Opinion — what your apartment at The Landmark at Strong Place would likely sell for today, what it costs to sell, and what you’d walk away with — reviewed personally against condition, exposures, renovation quality, and the competition actually on the market.

Minard Lafever is the reason. Lafever was the most widely read American architectural author of the 1830s and 1840s — his pattern books put Greek Revival doorways on row houses from Brooklyn to the Mississippi — and in 1847 he moved from New York to Brooklyn. The Strong Place Baptist Church, which he built in 1851–52 at the corner of Degraw Street and Strong Place, was an offshoot in South Brooklyn of the Pierrepont Street Baptist Church; both congregations were organized by the Rev. Dr. Elisha L. Tayler, and both took Lafever as their architect. Among the Strong Place church's original trustees was E. Darwin Litchfield. The adjoining Gothic chapel, where services were first held in 1849, is Lafever's as well.

The 1969 Cobble Hill designation report describes the building with unusual attention: a stone church dominated by a massive square tower at the junction of the streets, strengthened by large stepped buttresses rising its full height to frame the triple arched openings of the belfry; a narrow turret with lancet windows balancing it asymmetrically near the west aisle; and between them a gabled façade whose dominant feature is a triply pointed Gothic arch window. The whole is enclosed by a strong but simple iron railing with very tall gate posts of unusual design.

The congregation's later history is its own Brooklyn story. By the mid-twentieth century the building was known as the Spanish Baptist Church; in May 1969 it was rededicated as St. Frances Cabrini Chapel, serving the neighborhood's Italian community, and that same year the chapel and adjoining hall at Nos. 56–58 opened as the Strong Place Day Care Center with a kindergarten, cafeteria and Head Start program.

The residential chapter begins in 2005, when Strongrew Realty LLC bought the property, and runs through the conversion by Ingui Architecture — new floorplates and new windows inserted into the church volume, with interior woodwork, paneling and stained glass salvaged and reused. What that produces is not a building with unit lines. It is 23 apartments, each shaped by where it lands inside a Gothic Revival church: some under the nave's height, some against the buttressed walls, some in the chapel, some with private yards, some with balconies, and none of them repeating.

For buyers, the proposition is architecture that cannot be reproduced and apartments that cannot be comped by line. For sellers, the same fact is the whole marketing strategy — and the reason a building-average price per square foot here is nearly meaningless.

Architecture and unit composition

The property is a 15,890-square-foot corner lot carrying roughly 32,885 square feet of building area, formed from two combined structures: the 1851–52 church and the 1849 chapel. The offering plan describes the renovated building as a cellar, four stories and a mezzanine — and elsewhere in the same document as a cellar plus five stories, an inconsistency the plan never resolves. Department of Finance records four floors. What the discrepancy actually reflects is the reality of the conversion: floorplates inserted into a volume that was never designed to have them do not land at consistent levels, and "story" is an approximation in a building like this.

The unit mix as filed ran from a single two-bedroom/one-bath through three-bedroom layouts with up to three baths, and the plan's own energy schedules record apartments ranging from roughly 850 square feet to well over 5,400. Ingui Architecture's project record puts the design intent plainly: 23 units, each unique in character and in relationship to the building, with interior woodwork, paneling and stained glass salvaged and reused where possible.

Limited common elements are specific and worth knowing by unit. Units 1-H and 1-I each have exclusive use of a private yard. Units 3-A, 4-A, 4-B and 4-D carry balconies. Each owner of a unit with a limited common element handles the painting, decorating and ordinary non-structural maintenance of it; structural and extraordinary repairs fall to the condominium unless the owner caused the need.

The Landmarks constraint is absolute and the plan says so in a single sentence: the building has landmark status, which means the exterior may not be changed. In a converted church, that reaches further than it does in a row house — the buttresses, the belfry openings, the lancet turret, the triply pointed arch window and the iron railing with its tall gate posts are all protected fabric, and so is every window opening the conversion inserted into it.

Building operations

The operating model here is deliberately minimal and a buyer should size it correctly. The offering plan states that there is no superintendent and no doorman. Whatever staffing arrangement exists today began from that base, and the current arrangement — porter, part-time super, contracted services — should be confirmed rather than assumed. In a 23-unit building the practical consequence is that common charges are low relative to a serviced condominium and that residents carry more of the day-to-day themselves.

The capital agenda is the opposite of minimal, and it is where diligence should concentrate. This is a stone church from 1851–52 with a masonry tower, stepped buttresses, a belfry, a slate-and-gable roof profile, a lancet turret, salvaged stained glass and an inserted structural floor system, all under Landmarks jurisdiction and all in the Local Law 11 façade cycle. Every one of those elements is expensive to maintain correctly and conspicuous when it is not. There is also an elevator serving 23 apartments and a five-space parking component.

Ask for the last three years of audited statements, the reserve balance, the current assessment schedule, the FISP filing history and the board minutes — and ask specifically what masonry, roof and window work has been done since the 2011–12 sellout, and what the Commission required. Management history and current agent details are maintained in The Roebling Research Library and confirmed with clients during diligence.

Policy framework

Purchaser review: No board approval. The board holds a right of first refusal on sales and leases in the standard condominium form; confirm the current procedure in the by-laws.

House rules: The condominium's rules and regulations rest on the First Amendment to the By-Laws filed October 10, 2010. They are a conventional set with a few building-specific provisions worth knowing: no access to the roof; no plants or flower boxes on any part of the roof without prior written board approval; no window guards or other window security barriers without written board approval; no air conditioners other than window units without board approval; and a package room used at the owner's own risk, with a caution against leaving anything dangerous or valuable in it.

Quiet hours: No loud music or television between midnight and 7:00 a.m. where it disturbs other occupants; no musical instruments or singing between 10:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m.; construction and repair work only on weekdays between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. absent an emergency.

Pets: Permitted; animals in public areas must be carried or on a leash.

Access: The managing agent must hold a key to each unit and must be given a key to any new lock. If entry is necessary or permitted under the rules and no key has been provided, the unit may be forced open without liability for the resulting damage. That is an unusually direct provision and worth reading before closing.

Parking: Five parking units, one designated handicapped-accessible. If that space goes to a non-handicapped owner and a handicapped owner subsequently holds another, the handicapped owner can compel a trade.

Home occupations: Permitted where lawful, but patients and clients may not wait in the halls, lobby or any common area.

Flip tax: None disclosed in the materials reviewed.

Local Law 97

Carbon-penalty exposure
🟡
Moderate — under today's cap; material modeled 2030 exposure
2024–2029 annual penalty
$0 (under cap)
2030–2034 annual penalty
$9,007/yr
Per unit / month range
$0 – $33

Source: NYC LL84 benchmarking and PLUTO · The Roebling Research Library. City record last verified September 2026.

See full Local Law 97 analysis — emissions history, scenarios, methodology →

Recent sales

Recent closings at this building, curated by The Roebling Team research desk. Prices are the transfer amounts recorded with the NYC Department of Finance; apartment-level detail is checked against the building’s own file in The Roebling Research Library before publishing.

DateUnitApartmentPricePPSFvs. Ask
Jun 2, 20252H
2 BR · 2 BA · 1,105 sf
$1,675,000$1,516/sf-4.3%
Mar 27, 20253H
1 BR · 1,105 sf
$1,518,000$1,374/sfoff-mkt
Aug 16, 20241D
2 BR · 2 BA · 1,235 sf
$2,025,000$1,640/sf+9.5%
Jul 1, 20244C
2 BR · 2 BA · 1,400 sf
$1,800,000$1,286/sf+5.9%
Dec 14, 20231B
3 BR · 2 BA · 1,855 sf
$2,600,000$1,402/sf+0.0%
May 19, 20231H
3 BR · 3 BA · 2,160 sf
$4,250,000$1,968/sf+0.0%
Apr 3, 20231E
2 BR · 1,550 sf
$1,780,000$1,148/sfoff-mkt
Apr 3, 20232I
1 BR · 2 BA · 1,135 sf
$1,520,000$1,339/sfoff-mkt

Market read. Most recent trades (2025) cleared a median $1,445/sf across 2 sales. Median listing discount 1.2% from the last ask — a recurring negotiation gap worth pricing into any offer or listing strategy.

The retrade record

Lines that have traded more than once in the public record — the building’s appreciation arc, apartment by apartment.

1H · 2,160 sf+117%
$1,960,000 ($907/sf) 2011$2,850,000 ($1,319/sf) 2013$4,250,000 ($1,968/sf) 2023
4C · 1,400 sf+83%
$985,000 ($704/sf) 2012$1,800,000 ($1,286/sf) 2024
4A · 1,525 sf+83%
$1,437,500 ($943/sf) 2011$2,625,000 ($1,721/sf) 2017
1D · 1,235 sf+78%
$1,135,000 ($919/sf) 2012$1,715,000 ($1,389/sf) 2020$2,025,000 ($1,640/sf) 2024
3H · 1,105 sf+56%
$972,428 ($880/sf) 2012$955,000 ($864/sf) 2013$1,518,000 ($1,374/sf) 2025
View all 53 recorded sales, sortable

Full closing history with price-per-square-foot over time, the complete retrade record, and every line that has traded.

Sales sourced from NYC Department of Finance recorded transfers (BBL 3-00323-7503) and verified listing data. Apartment-level facts (line, condition, asking-price context) curated and cross-verified by The Roebling Team research desk. Not all transactions cross-verify with ACRIS records — sponsor and LLC purchases sometimes record at stipulated values rather than market price; square footage from recorded condo declarations and offering plans.

What to know if you’re buying

There is no comparable line — pull the plan. Twenty-three unique apartments ranging from roughly 850 to over 5,400 square feet. Get the specific unit's area and layout from the offering plan schedules before you accept anyone's price per square foot.

Underwrite the masonry. A stone church from 1851–52 with a tower, stepped buttresses, a belfry and a lancet turret, all under Landmarks jurisdiction and in the Local Law 11 cycle. Read the reserve, the assessment history and the last façade filing. This is the single largest financial variable in the building.

Staffing started at zero. The plan provided for no superintendent and no doorman. Confirm what exists now and price the service level accordingly — it is part of why common charges sit where they do.

Know your limited common element. Private yards attach to Units 1-H and 1-I; balconies to 3-A, 4-A, 4-B and 4-D. Ordinary maintenance is yours; structural repair is the condominium's.

Read the house rules before you sign. No roof access, no non-window air conditioners without approval, no window guards without approval, and a managing-agent key requirement backed by a forced-entry provision. None of these are unusual individually; together they describe how the building is run.

What to know if you’re selling

Lead with Lafever. A documented Minard Lafever church, described in detail in the Landmarks Preservation Commission's own 1969 report, is a credential no competing Cobble Hill condominium can claim. Name him and quote the report.

Photograph the original fabric. Salvaged woodwork, paneling and stained glass, the arch openings, the buttressed walls. The conversion's whole argument is that the church is still visible from inside.

Publish the area and the plan. In a building with no repeating unit, the seller who documents square footage, ceiling condition and limited common elements controls the pricing conversation.

Present the capital story. Buyers know what nineteenth-century church masonry costs. A completed-projects narrative with the paperwork behind it converts far better than silence.

Closings are condominium-fast. Right of first refusal only, no board interview, no financing minimum beyond the lender's — a genuine advantage against the district's cooperative inventory.

Comparable buildings

If you're considering 58 Strong Place, also evaluate:

How to read the facts on this page. Items attributed to an offering plan describe the building as it was offered at that filing — unit mix, square footage, the amenity program as planned. They are not a statement about how the building operates today. Tax and compliance figures are sourced separately to current City records and carry their own dates. House rules, staffing and fee policy can change by board resolution without any public filing: treat every policy line here as a starting point for diligence and confirm it with the managing agent. Where this page compares one building or neighborhood to another, that is our analysis of the recorded record — it names the measure, the period and the sample it rests on, and it is an observation about medians rather than a prediction about any particular apartment.

Considering a move at The Landmark at Strong Place?

Request a private building brief with the relevant comparable sales, current and off-market availability, and an apartment-specific view of value.

Prefer to speak directly? Schedule a consultation →
Corey Cohen, Principal · The Roebling Team at Compass
646.939.7375 · c.cohen@compass.com