« Are All New Developments Ugly? West Indian Day Parade 2005 Photos »
September 21, 2005
House of the Day: Greene Avenue Goodness
We're digging this 4-story Bed Stuy brownstone and suspect that it will be snatched up quickly. The house appears to have all its original details in quite good shape, from the gorgeous parquet wood floors to the dark-stained molding and wood paneling. The parlor floor ceilings also look to be extremely high. We have no idea what the rest of the block is like though, but at $699,000 (or about $200 a foot) this is sounding like a pretty good deal to us. Has anyone been inside yet?
770 Greene Avenue [Corcoran] GMAP
Comments
I like the side approach to the stoop!
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 11:53 AM
very far down with an occupied rental, but looks lovely. Corcoran never underprices, so I imagine there's a catch....
Posted by: clinton hillbilly at September 21, 2005 12:57 PM
well I do know one thing unflattering about it, I'm pretty sure it's in a two fair zone so its not near a convient train line.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 1:16 PM
Two fair zone? I don't think with metrocard they that term exists anymore. You're dating yourself.
But yes - a bit of a walk to subway.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 1:45 PM
2-Fair-Zone commonly means a bus then a subway ... I am sure the term is still in use even with the advent of the metrocard.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 1:58 PM
Probably not the prettiest stretch of greene ave, but looks like a great house and pretty good price.
Posted by: pietro at September 21, 2005 2:08 PM
I would not live on that part of green if you paid me 699k. It's toooo far from the train and when I lived in the neighborhood night time became fright time!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 2:11 PM
um, is it fair to charge this much for a house in a two-FARE zone?
Posted by: suzy at September 21, 2005 2:23 PM
Fair Suzy, we in Brooklyn take liberties with spelling, as we do with pronounciation.
Posted by: Hal at September 21, 2005 2:53 PM
I hadn't heard of the expression "2 fare zone" since the MTA did away with tokens.
Posted by: DN at September 21, 2005 2:58 PM
One fare - two modes of transportation. Can't we all just get along?
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 3:01 PM
Seems very nice on the inside, love the big spaces. Yes, it's a bit of a walk to the subway but that area is not so scary these days.
Posted by: Kate at September 21, 2005 3:13 PM
Floor plan looks a bit wonky...full bath off the kitchen/dining area and only a half bath on the parlor floor?
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 3:31 PM
700,000 to live right near the projects. All your neighbors will live at or below the poverty line. Yeah BedStuy.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 4:51 PM
700,000 to live right near the projects. All your neighbors will live at or below the poverty line. Yeah BedStuy.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 4:52 PM
yeah Clinton Hill, Carrol Gardens, RedHook, Harlem, Fort Greene. yeah, Brooklyn. yea, New York City.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 5:00 PM
Exactly. Yeah East Village, yeah Chelsea. Sorry, but the list goes on.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 5:30 PM
A friend of mine lives on the same block as this house, and tells me that about 75% of the block is owner occupied, and becoming more so each day.
Her daughter is enrolled in Pratt's children's program and they walk it there every Saturday. Block is not too too bad, but it'll get better.
Posted by: browngirl at September 21, 2005 6:46 PM
hmm @ anon 4:52 as a resident of bedstuy I take offense to that. there's nothing wrong with bedstuy, I live in stuyvesant heights and I wouldn't want to live anywhere else. bedstuy is beautiful but then again I'm not opposed to living near people 'who are below the poverty line'. I'm familiar with that area, (I was the original poster who brought up the 2-fare zone) and there's a police station within a reasonable distance of this area so if you're implying that just because people 'live below the poverty line' that they'd want to take something from you (who is obviously more fortunate than those of us who aren't good enough to live outside of bedstuy) then maybe that should be taken into account.
Posted by: blkbuttrflie at September 21, 2005 7:39 PM
Tacking onto Anon 5:00 and 5:30's lists, every NYC neighborhood I've ever lived in has put me within stone's throw of public housing: UES, Chelsea, EV/Stuy Town, Boerum Hill. And these are all SAFE and EXPENSIVE 'hoods. So I guess my point is, so what? Also, it's patently untrue that everyone living in the projects is at or below the poverty line. Simply.Not.True.
Posted by: JC at September 21, 2005 8:35 PM
Truth in advertising sometimes lends itself to understatements, or Corcoranisms in the NYC real estate market. In this case, as another poster mentioned, the most obvious Corcoranism is the part of the listing that states "occupied rental." I was intrigued by the ad, and when I followed-up with a Corcoran broker I was told that the tenant has a life estate that could probably be purchased for somewhere in the area of $600k. Hope you are digging that house in the ghetto for $1.3. It's a steal.
Posted by: Steve at September 21, 2005 8:43 PM
I'm a little ignorant, what's a home estate?
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 8:46 PM
That's life estate; it means that the person living in the rental unit has an almost unlimited property interest in the unit during that individual's lifetime. The interest is freely divisible, so that person A with the life estate can sell their interest in the rental to someone else, although successive interests would continue to be measured by person A's life. I'm told here that the person with the life estate is sixteen years old. This is probably the most dishonest bit of adverting I've seen.
Posted by: Steve at September 21, 2005 8:55 PM
Brownstoner, shame on you. This site has become nothing more than a predatory vehicle to promote overpriced Brooklyn real estate. I don't mind the listings, but your neutrality is feigned. You have an obligation to your readers to do some due diligence before you proudly display your "buy it now" house of the day.
Posted by: Momma Jones at September 21, 2005 9:00 PM
WOW that's certainly something good to know. well... there we have it, its so sad that as soon as we saw a reasonably priced Corcoran listing we KNEW there was a catch and of course there was. thanks Steve!
Posted by: blkbuttrflie at September 21, 2005 9:05 PM
Jeezus that is a really deceitful listing. Who is the broker responsible? Why do they try to hide this like nobody will find out? That is really bad PR.
Posted by: Franklin Ave. Posse at September 21, 2005 9:11 PM
I contacted Corcoran about the listing as well. One apartment is occupied, but the house offered as delivered vacant, with no such "life estate".
Posted by: Anonymous at September 21, 2005 9:26 PM
Thank's Barbara! I wonder how many new employees that have had to commission to do damage control on the web. Selling properties with life estates, that is really a new industry low.
Posted by: Rasputin at September 21, 2005 9:46 PM
I think that there is some confusion regarding this house. I also spoke to the broker and there is no life estate and no 16 year old..Someone has confused this with another property...
Posted by: laura at September 21, 2005 10:29 PM
As the owner of this house, let me address some of the comments here. I know predators, scandal and deceit make for great speculation and thrive in Brooklyn's real estate market, but I'm sorry to report that there are none of those here.
The house is merely a very nice and architecturally interesting building from the 1890's with no leins or "life estates", offered at market price -- slightly below, if anything. Having been a long time reader of brownstoner.com, I was pleasantly surprised to see our house appear on the site after it was listed with Corcoran; I'll address the resulting comments one by one.
First, "Steve" apparently inquired about the house and was told that there is a sixteen year old tenant in the house with a "life estate". This is as absurd as it sounds. If Steve was in fact told this, that is disturbing news indeed and I'd like to get to the bottom of it. To set the record straight: we have a couple in one apartment. They are great tenants interested in staying on in the house, but they have generously been flexible to moving on fair notice. The house can be either "delivered vacant" (a nice way of saying that tenants are asked to move) or, preferably, they can stay on with a new owner. Ideally, we hope to accomodate both buyer as well as tenant, but we understand that a buyer needs to have a measure of control of the terms. But I'm sorry to say that there are no rent controls, "life estates", or secret Nigerian 411 holds on the house. As anyone who's bought a house knows, hidding anything like that would prove a waste of everyone's time as it would all show up during the searches at closing. If there is any more uncertainty on this misinformation, feel free to contact our broker who can answer your questions.
Second: as for pricing, the debate about whether it's too high or too low probably means it's reasonable, much to blkbuttrflie's surprise. It's consistent with, and perhaps slightly below, what other buildings in the area have been selling for. It's priced to sell. Negotiating price is part of any real estate transaction. There's no catch. We've tried to price it fairly. I know that's unusual.
Third: while it's fair to say it's a two fare zone, I enjoy the 10-15 minute walk to the train.
Posted by: jknight at September 21, 2005 11:33 PM
I hope that everyone who's posting stuff like "shame on you brownstoner" feels really stupid...p.s. how is this blog a "predatory vehicle?"...
Posted by: Anonymous at September 22, 2005 7:18 AM
Actually, Momma Jones, we don't have an obligation to do due diligence. This is shoot-from-the-hip stuff and we don't hold it out as anything other than that. It's pretty clear that all we're doing is expressing our opinion based on a few photos and lines of text written by a real estate broker. The due diligence is for anyone who gets interested in the property.
Posted by: Brownstoner at September 22, 2005 8:38 AM
I don't buy it. My conspiratorial ears are burning. I have asked Corcoran to comment on this thread.
Posted by: Ricardo at September 22, 2005 8:40 AM
wow...a conspiracy...how about focusing on the fact that it's more likely that an interested buyer would post misinformation about this renter to acare other people off...come on guys - like the press don't believe everything you read on a blog...and do your own diligence
Posted by: Anonymous at September 22, 2005 9:42 AM
You'd think that person could come up with something better than a 16-year-old with a "life estate."
Posted by: Anonymous at September 22, 2005 10:06 AM
this discussion has definitely taken on a life of its own I'd certainly like to know what Corcoran has to say (in response to someone asking that they comment) especially since its pretty sad that people have gone to the point of conspiracy theories just because there's a listing with Corcoran that's somewhat decent. that certainly says a lot about their reputation. I appreciate the owner (I think) chiming in as well.
Posted by: blkbuttrflie at September 22, 2005 11:48 AM
Honestly why should Corcoran have to respond to the buffoons on this site. They should only respond to legitimate inquiries that come to them directly in a legitimate fashion. I am not normally one to defend Corcoran but honestly, these liars are worthless and don't help ANYONE.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 22, 2005 12:48 PM
"bafoons" is a bit harsh (AND unnecessary). I tend to think clarifying the details about this listing is a legitimate request.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 22, 2005 2:13 PM
Absolutely they should clarify - to those who contact them directly because they are interested in this property. My point was just that I wouldn't fault them for not responding to purposefully misleading information posted here.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 22, 2005 2:26 PM
What are you implying about brownstoner? That because he gets revenue, probably very little from advertisements etc., that he is posting false information in order to influence interest in listings? What bullsh*t. Get over yourselves and your conspiratorial suspicions. If you really care, go to the d*amn house and check it out. Make an appointment with Corcoran! This site is for information and exchange of ideas, no need to imply that brownstoner is a disseminator of misinformation with a view to making money (i.e. fraud). Maybe I'm reading too much into the Sometime Kinda's post, but people should be careful about making such accusations, implied or explicit.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 23, 2005 10:08 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.