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 →
Cooperative · 1888
60 Pineapple Street
60 Pineapple Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201
Buildings·Cooperative

60 Pineapple Street

60 Pineapple Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201

Brooklyn Heights, Brooklyn

BBL 3002310030 · BIN 3326025

At a glance
Year built
1888
Type
Cooperative
Units
74
Floors
8
Landmark
Designated
Board & building profile
Subletting
Board consent (majority resolution/written) or shareholder consent required per plan as filed; formal sublease application in current use
Pets
No animal without written permission of the co-op, revocable (house rules as filed); effectively board-consent

Compiled by The Roebling Research Desk from the building’s offering plan, amendments, and related building documents (primary source dated 1981-82 plan documents; sublease/purchase applications current as of 2024 library refresh). 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, 2004–2026

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

Median $/sf
$1,131
Listing discount
0.3%
Recorded sales
88
On record
2004–2026
Considering a sale?

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

A Private Pricing Opinion — what your apartment at 60 Pineapple Street 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.

60 Pineapple Street is the historic district's quiet loft building. From the sidewalk it reads as one of the Fruit Streets' big Victorian-era brick survivors — eight stories of bearing-wall masonry from the 1880s, towering politely over its row-house neighbors between Hicks and Henry. Inside, it is something the Brooklyn Heights Historic District almost never offers: open-plan apartments with exposed brick and genuine square footage, the product of a 1981 gut conversion that turned a faded Class "B" hotel into what its offering plan called "legal open space cooperative apartments." The Heights has grander co-ops and older houses; it has very few places where a buyer gets loft volume behind an 1880s façade on one of the most storied blocks in the neighborhood.

The building's biography tracks the Heights' own. It went up in the mid-1880s — DOF says 1888, the LPC's records say 1885, and the conversion engineers would only commit to "prior to 1900" — in the era when the neighborhood's first tall flats and apartment hotels rose among the brownstones, and the LPC's district records leave both architect and style unattributed, a common fate for the Heights' commercial-scale Victorians. By the postwar decades it was operating as lodging-house stock under a Class B hotel certificate of occupancy, the same trajectory that carried many Heights buildings toward SRO use. The 1965 district designation — the city's first — froze the streetscape; the 1981 conversion by Pinecross Realty Company, with architect Henry G. Greene drawing the residential plans and the sponsor obtaining Landmarks certificates for the work, brought the building back as housing. Fifteen thousand and eighty-six shares across 73 offered units, a modernized elevator, new systems and sprinklers, and a J-51 abatement completed the standard early-1980s conversion playbook.

What survived the playbook is the point. The wood-frame-and-brick structure imposed apartment shapes rather than tower lines: big open living volumes, exposed masonry, loft storage attached to the large first-floor units, and unit sizes that run from efficient studios to spreads over 2,400 square feet per the plan's own floor plans. Three blocks from the Promenade and around the corner from the Clark Street 2/3 express, with the LH-1 limited-height zoning and the district designation jointly guaranteeing the low-rise setting, 60 Pineapple occupies a niche whose competition is mostly across the river.

For buyers, the building is a character play with co-op economics; for sellers, it is a differentiation story — there is no adjacent inventory that duplicates the combination of district address, loft interior, and 1880s fabric.

Architecture and unit composition

The structure is the story: brick bearing walls with timber framing, eight stories and roughly 79 feet — non-fireproof construction of a scale rarely attempted in it, which is why the conversion added a new sprinkler system, new heating plant, and rebuilt roof, and why the floor plates convert so well to open plans. The 73 offered units range from compact one-bedroom-scale apartments to the plan's documented first-floor spreads (2,480, 2,390, and 1,935 square feet, each with several hundred square feet of loft storage). Exposed brick recurs through the inventory; layouts are unit-specific rather than stacked lines, so light, ceiling feel, and proportion need apartment-level evaluation. Windows and exterior work run through the LPC, which protects the streetscape that gives the building its setting.

Building operations

60 Pineapple Residence Corp. has run the building since the 1982-era closing. The conversion-era operating model — resident superintendent and porter, self-service elevator, first-floor laundry, per-floor compactor rooms — reflects a deliberately lean, lower-maintenance service tier rather than a staffed-lobby building, and the co-op's long record of financial statements in The Roebling Research Library (spanning two decades) supports diligence on how that model has held up. Current staffing, capital plans, and any assessment history should be confirmed at offer stage; for an 1880s masonry building, FISP/LL11 façade cycles are the recurring capital item to review.

Policy framework

Pets: Under the house rules as filed, no bird or animal may be kept without the co-op's written permission, and permission is revocable; dogs must be carried or leashed in public areas. Functionally a board-consent policy — confirm current practice.

Subletting: Assignment or sublet requires board consent (resolution or written majority) or shareholder consent under the plan as filed; the co-op maintains a formal sublease application. Confirm current term limits and fees.

Alterations: Shareholder renovations are contractually bound to Landmarks procedure where exterior effects are possible — a real constraint on window and façade-adjacent work, and the standard alteration agreement is in the Library.

Flip tax, financing minimums, pied-à-terre, washer-dryer: Not publicly documented; confirm with the board at offer stage.

Facade safety — Local Law 11

Local Law 11 / FISP · last inspection 2020–25
SWARMP
What this means for you

The latest available filing classified the facade as SWARMP — Safe With A Repair and Maintenance Program: the engineer identified conditions requiring monitoring or repair before the next inspection cycle. The scope, timeline, and how the building funds the work are building-specific — we review the filings and board materials for you.

Inspection history
2005–10
SWARMP
2010–15
Safe
2015–20
Safe
2020–25
SWARMP
2025–30
Due
Next report due
by Feb 2029
Assessed · 2005–10 to 2020–25
$4,000 in filing penalties
payment status not in the record
The three grades, in buyer terms
SafeLatest filing: Safe — no repairs required at that inspection.
SWARMPLatest filing: repairs required before the next inspection cycle.
UnsafeLatest filing: unsafe conditions requiring corrective action.
How to read this, and where it comes from

QEWI = Qualified Exterior Wall Inspector — the licensed engineer the city requires to sign the report (the independent expert, not the managing agent).

Penalties shown are amounts DOB assessed against filings on record across 2005–10 to 2020–25. The FISP dataset does not record whether they were paid, contested or remain open, so treat the figure as history rather than a current balance and confirm the building’s standing with the managing agent.

Source: NYC DOB facade filings (FISP) · The Roebling Research Library. City record last verified September 2026.

See the full facade history →

Recent sales

Recent transfers 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 22, 20263G
1 BR · 1 BA · 1,250 sf
$1,375,000$1,100/sf-1.4%
Jan 20, 20261F
1 BA · 585 sf
$485,000$829/sf+0.0%
Jul 9, 20257E
1 BR · 1 BA
$760,000+4.8%
Jun 30, 20257I
2 BR · 1.5 BA
$1,810,000+6.5%
Sep 30, 20243C
1 BR · 1 BA · 1,295 sf
$1,166,333$901/sf-6.7%
Jun 26, 20246FG
3 BR · 2.5 BA
$3,425,000+10.5%
Jun 24, 20242J
3 BR · 2 BA
$1,945,000+2.6%
Apr 17, 20244H
2 BR · 2 BA · 1,265 sf
$1,275,000$1,008/sf+0.0%

Market read. Most recent trades (2026) cleared a median $1,131/sf across 2 sales. Median listing discount 0.3% 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.

1B · 2,800 sf+127%
$1,100,000 ($393/sf) 2010$2,500,000 ($893/sf) 2015
3C · 1,295 sf+125%
$519,000 ($401/sf) 2007$1,166,333 ($901/sf) 2024
6H · 1,265 sf+118%
$585,000 2004$735,000 2010$1,275,000 ($1,008/sf) 2015
4J+112%
$1,040,000 2007$1,775,000 ($1,203/sf) 2014$2,200,000 2023
7E+101%
$379,000 2008$533,000 ($888/sf) 2016$695,000 2019$760,000 2025

Other recent transfers

DateUnitPrice
Oct 18, 20043B$679,000
View all 88 recorded transfers, 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 3-00231-0030) 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 on co-ops is not officially recorded, figures shown are approximate.

What to know if you’re buying

This is the district's loft option. If the goal is open volume and exposed brick with a Brooklyn Heights address, the realistic alternatives are few — evaluate against both the Heights prewar stock and the DUMBO conversions to see the trade clearly.

Expect apartment-level variation. An 1880s bearing-wall building converted unit-by-unit has no repeating lines; ceiling feel, light, and storage differ meaningfully between adjacent apartments.

The service tier is lean by design. Self-service elevator, no door staff — maintenance stays lower and the building self-selects for residents who prefer it; budget accordingly rather than comparing against staffed buildings.

Landmarks discipline applies to alterations. Renovation plans with any exterior effect route through the LPC under the co-op's own documents; build the timeline into your plans.

Confirm the policy file early. Pet consents, sublet limits, financing standards, and any flip tax are board-level facts; get current answers from management before offer.

What to know if you’re selling

Sell the combination, not the category. District address plus loft interior plus 1880s fabric is the pitch — photograph the volume and the brick, and state the storage rights where they exist.

Anchor pricing to the building's own trades. Per-room comparisons against conventional Heights prewar understate open-plan value; the building's recent sales, adjusted for floor and light, are the honest baseline.

Package the alteration history. Buyers of converted 1880s stock scrutinize renovation quality; approved alteration files and Landmarks sign-offs materially de-risk board review and negotiation.

Position the location's specifics. Fruit Streets calm, Promenade proximity, and the Clark Street express stop deserve explicit billing — the block is the amenity.

Comparable buildings

If you're considering 60 Pineapple Street, also evaluate:

Preparing a board package for this building?

The full playbook — what goes in the package, how boards read your financials, the interview, and the timeline — plus sample cover, reference, and personal letters you can adapt.

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 60 Pineapple Street?

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