« 469 Park Place: I'm Burning, I'm Burning for You HOTD: Under The Radar at 351 Van Brunt »

May 4, 2006

397 Jefferson Goes Into Contract...Finally

houseWe received word this week that 397 Jefferson Avenue, which was listed as an Open House Pick back in December at $699,000, has gone into contract. The price? $650,000. At the time, one reader had this to say about the house: "Needs major work. I viewed it last week. Sagging ceilings etc. Need architect, engineer and contractor." Compared to what people are used to, five months to get a get deal is long time. GMAP
Open House Picks [Brownstoner]




Posted by Brownstoner at 11:07 AM | Comments (46)
Categories: Sales

Comments

What are people's opinions of this part of Bed Stuy? Not trying to start a flame war, looking for info for a friend who's house hunting in the area. Thanks.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2006 11:31 AM

Some parts of Bed-Stuy is still hit or miss. That said, some of the "hit" blocks are Great. I'm a new Bstone owner on Putnam, one block over from Jefferson. I have GREAT neighbors who care about their respective homes...Sweep the side walk.. Tree Lined... Culturally Diverse... Homes on the block featured on the Walking Tour..etc. True Neighborhood feel.

Posted by: NewStoner at May 4, 2006 12:13 PM

Jefferson is one of the best blocks in all of Bed-Stuy. IMHO, the best streets are (from north to south)Jefferson, Hancock, Halsey, Macon, Macdonough, Decatur, Banbridge and Chauncey, and (from west to east) Nostrand to Malcom X. This area is prime brownstone Bed-Stuy and very close to the A/C train line which is on Fulton. That section of the nabe is very uniformed with tree lined streets and amazing brownstones. In ten years it will probably obtain landmark status and no one but the rich would be able to afford a home in the area.

My advice. Buy a home (even a fixer upper) on one of the best blocks. Don't buy near any apartment buildings if you can help it.

Posted by: BrownBomber at May 4, 2006 12:37 PM

how about macdonough between ralph and howard? further east, but what are its prospects?

Posted by: bed-stuy curious at May 4, 2006 12:45 PM

BrownBomber -- do you mean the whole square defined by those streets? Or is it hit and miss within that outline?

Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2006 12:59 PM

I don't know that area well enough to comment. Never been on that block. To me, BS is very block specific that far east. The area I mentioned above (plus putnam, monroe and madison too) is more predictable and uniformed. This ten square blocks area is larger than either Fort Greene or Clinton Hill and has fabulous housing stock.

Posted by: BrownBomber at May 4, 2006 1:00 PM

Square area would be defined by Monroe to Fulton and Nostrand to Malcolm X. The eastern portion of the area includes Stuyvesant Heights.

Posted by: BrownBomber at May 4, 2006 1:40 PM

The western border of Bed-Stuy is Classon Ave. There are plenty of nice blocks starting from there. Also don't be afraid to cross to the other side of Fulton St. There are a few hidden gems between Fulton & Atlantic, including Lefferts Place and Breevort

Posted by: Nativegal at May 4, 2006 2:31 PM

Square area would be defined by Monroe to Fulton and Nostrand to Malcolm X. The eastern portion of the area includes Stuyvesant Heights.

Posted by: BrownBomber at May 4, 2006 2:33 PM

As I stated before. W/ the exception of the historic district Stuyvesant Heights(where people continually stretch the boundaries) The blocks are hit or miss. But the Further East you go past Stuyvesant, the more "misses" you'll get. Bushwick is pretty challenging. You're pretty safe From Classon to Stuyvesant & Fulton to Madison. It's very sketchy outside of those areas.

Posted by: NewStoner at May 4, 2006 3:06 PM

This is an article from 1985 NY Times about Bed-Stuy brownstones:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990DE0D91039F933A25753C1A963948260&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fB%2fBrownstones

The Bed-Stuy brownstones haven't changed much, just the willingness of people to consider living in the neighborhood.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2006 3:21 PM

aren't the borders of bed-stuy, by definition, bedford ave. and stuyvesant ave?
SoHo doesn't start at bleecker street, right. . .it's the same idea, i think

Posted by: tripster at May 4, 2006 3:36 PM

I don't think this is a discussion about boundaries, Just the Nabe!

Posted by: NewStoner at May 4, 2006 5:07 PM

I don't know the definite eastern boundary of the stuy but I do know that its not beteween stuyvesant and bedford. the general consensus is that it begins on Classon I know it goes far past stuyvesant though past including utica, patchen, ralph etc... I would venture to say its broadway probably near broadway junction or a little farther.

Posted by: stuy blkbuttrflie. at May 4, 2006 5:16 PM

as far as "by definition" actually the name of the neighborhood has nothing to do with those two aves. it was the combination of two areas bedford and stuyvesant that forced the creation of the name "Bed-Stuy". also, I know this isn't considered common knowledge and people shouldn't be expected to know this but I'm almost positive that bedstuy is the largest neighborhood in brooklyn and one of the largest in the country (though I could be wrong). the area between bedford and stuyvesant is only about 7-10 blocks, that wouldn't make sense in theory.

Posted by: stuy blkbuttrflie. at May 4, 2006 5:21 PM

Once and for ALL!!! "...Today the boundaries of Bedford-Stuyvesant are Flushing Avenue on the north, Broadway on the east, Atlantic Avenue on the south, and Classon Avenue on the west. Bedford-Stuvyesant borders on Williamsburg (north), Bushwick (east), Crown Heights (south), and Clinton Hill (west). According to the The Encyclopedia of New York City, "Before 1977 it extended as far south as Eastern Parkway." Now that's a funny thing to read. Actually, before the early 1900s, the whole area was known simply as Bedford In the early 1900s, the part of the west was known as bedford, while the part to the east became known as Stuyvesant. In the 1920s and 1930s, a large part of central Bedford where many blacks had settled became known by the hyphenated name of Bedford-Stuyvesant. By the 1960s, this name was used not only for all of what we now know as Bedford-Stuyvesant but also for much of what we now know as Crown Heights. In 1968, the city established its system of community planning districts and defined Bedford-Stuyvesant as extending south to Eastern Parkway. In 1977, the city changed its mind and decided that the area between Atlantic Avenue and Eastern Parkway was Crown Heights, not Bedford-Stuyvesant. Even so, some community development organizations continued to define Bedford-Stuyvesant as extending to Eastern Parkway..." http://www.bedstuy.org/history.php

I hope we never have to talk about this again... ;-)

Posted by: NewStoner at May 4, 2006 5:38 PM

The bounderies are Flushing to the north, Atlantic to the south, bedford ave to the west and broadway/saratoga to the south east.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2006 5:40 PM

I recently saw a Corcoran ad for a house on Bedford Avenue advertised as Clinton Hill. Gotta love it.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2006 5:59 PM

The inquiry pertained to which AREAS of Bed-Stuy were deemed to be the most attractive, i.e., best. My opinion made reference to the square block area from Monroe to Fulton and Nostrand to Malcolm X. I called it Prime Brownstone Bed-Stuy. Of course BS is much bigger than this area. Can you people read? I don't get the tangent about boundaries. Whoah!

Posted by: BrownBomber at May 4, 2006 6:26 PM

Call down brownbomber before your fedora pops off your head. Someone changed the topic, just like you did, that's all.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2006 6:44 PM

Huh? Was that english?

I didn't change the topic. I simply responded to the first post by stating that this particular section of BS was a great area.

"What are people's opinions of this part of Bed Stuy? Not trying to start a flame war, looking for info for a friend who's house hunting in the area. Thanks. "

Anonymous 6:44pm. You really got to work on getting that GED. Your reading and writing skills are quite suspect. You obviously did not read this thread.

"Call down brownbomber before your fedora pops off your head. Someone changed the topic, just like you did, that's all."

Huh?

Posted by: BrownBomber at May 4, 2006 7:00 PM

Oh for Pete's sake, he meant "calm down," not "call down". An obvious typo. You should all calm down. The whole thread--digressions and all -- was interesting. Why people get touchy so quickly is beyond me!

Posted by: kcf at May 4, 2006 8:03 PM


I have an idea!

We should all get together in Bedstuy and march around with cameras pointing at Brownstones and make cash offers to old ladies on the street.

We'll call ourselves the Brownstoner gang, but instead of crime, we'll remake neighborhoods to our own liking and sell our houses within a few years . . . of course make millions . . . and then do the samething again in another hood.

LET'S Go! Last one to BedStuy is a rotten egg!

Posted by: Anonymous at May 4, 2006 10:18 PM

To get back to the question about East of Stuy Bed Stuy.
There are some great blocks over here and McDonough bet Ralph & Howard is one of them.
The houses tend to be smaller than the historic district (3 floors instead of 4/5) 2 families. Blocks are very stable with generation of families.

Posted by: BS Dave at May 4, 2006 10:20 PM

Brown Bomber..

Is that your attempt to appear more intelligent than someone else? Is it not possible for someone else to have changed the subject? Someone other than YOU?
Get a grip. Now let's hear your witty come-back.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 5, 2006 9:39 AM

If you look back at the posts, Brownbomber was the only one who actually mentioned Jefferson Ave....which was the original subject matter. So, how about 397 Jefferson? Anyone have anything to say about that?

Posted by: Yente at May 5, 2006 11:09 AM

Brownbomber, I often agree with some of your opinions on this blog, but you sure do get worked up about some trivial stuff sometimes. I think people are poking fun at you for that.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 5, 2006 12:56 PM

Yes, you're right. My apologies everyone. Didn't mean to take it there. No blood. Okay?

Posted by: BrownBomber at May 5, 2006 3:24 PM

Years ago I used to attend meetings of the old Brooklyn Brownstone Conference for my own neighborhood association. Anyway, there was a lady there named Ruby Ford who represented the group that organized house tours in BS, BUT she adamantly insisted that she represented the neighborhoods (plural) of Bedford and Stuyvesant Heights. Ms. Ford (IIRC) claimed that Bedford Stuyvesant, as a neighborhood name, was a construct of '50s tabloid newspapers, used, in a racist manor,to describe ANY predominantly black Brooklyn neighborhood(especially when they ran crime stories). Is there anything to this? And, if it WAS true30+ years ago, does it matter any more?

Posted by: Bob Marvin at May 6, 2006 11:07 PM

I have no doubt that the Bedford Stuyvesant name had long been in use during the period I wrote about, but FWIW,
Ruby Ford was a VERY impressive lady and she was very insistant about referring to
Bedford and Stuyvesant Heights as separate adjoining neighborhoods. Unfortunately, I lost touch with her after the Brooklyn Brownstone Conference went out of existance over 20 years ago.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at May 7, 2006 1:15 PM

Hmmm--the post from B2B I was replying to, in between my two posts above) seems to have been deleted--makes my posts seem redundant--sorry about that.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at May 7, 2006 3:57 PM

I'm pretty sure she got caught trolling under multiple names. If so, Mr. B would have deleted all of her posts.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 7, 2006 4:20 PM

I recently met the REAL B2B (at the opening of my photography show in PLG) and I'm VERY sure she's no troll. That being said,it must have been difficult to sort her real posts from the "spoofs" of her posts.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at May 7, 2006 6:25 PM

I could be wrong, but I think she was caught posting under multiple names. Someone asked Mr. B to check, and he did. I did not find this surprising. The numbers do not lie I guess.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 7, 2006 7:10 PM

As you can see,I can post and if you read the OPen House thread you'll see Mr. B's comment.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at May 7, 2006 11:49 PM

And thank you Bob- it was great fun and your photos are just beautiful. I think you were going to answer my question about when the neighborhood became known as Bed-Stuy?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at May 7, 2006 11:51 PM

Let\'s just not have anymore of this posting under multiple names BS. You\'re ruining this blog and basically forcing Mr. B to resort to registrations and logins. I hope you\'re happy with yourself.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 8, 2006 6:05 AM

Bx2Bklyn, I must say I am disappointed that you of all people would be found masquerading under a number of different handles (assuming, of course, that what I am reading here is all correct). I just do not understand. This blog is so much more interesting when we stay on topic.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 8, 2006 8:35 AM

Sorry to disappoint you but if anyone is posting under multiple names it is the troll. It's not enough to go after CHP. Now every thread we post on will become a discussion of who said what, not the topic. Mr. B and I have been in touch and he knows I am not the problem.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at May 8, 2006 9:43 AM

Did you or did you not post under at least two different names in the open house thread? Please just answer the question.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 8, 2006 9:56 AM

Hmmm. Now I am beginning to wonder if she did it. I will only believe it if I see her say it, though.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 8, 2006 2:25 PM

You're not making sense. You're saying that, if admits to you that she's a liar, then you'll believe she's a liar. However, if she is a liar, then how can you expect her to tell the truth about being a liar? I think we face the well-known Paradox of the Liar here.

My understanding of what happened is just this. Mr. B checked to see which IP address was responsible for posts under the name "Bx2Bkln" and "PLG Fan". It turned out that a single IP address was responsible for posts that were appearing under BOTH of these names. When Mr. B then deleted all of the posts issuing from that IP address, Bx2Bklyn's posts disappeared from all over the blog. So, insofar as I understand all of this, she had to have been posting under multiple names.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 8, 2006 5:19 PM

Excuse me troll at 5:19, 2:25 &9:56:

But as you can see, I am still posting, and my posts have not "disappeared all over the blog". Mr. B said he accidentally blocked me instead of the real troll. PLG fan has said they will no longer post because of you. And it must be pretty obvious what you are doing because this thread is not about me, as much as you would like it to be. Actually it's all about you, isn't it? You must not have much of a life.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at May 8, 2006 5:32 PM

Hey, chill! I was just speculating and I'm totally open to having my speculations upended! When I said it was my understanding that you were posting under both "Bx2Bklyn" and "PLG Fan", that's all I meant. Are you telling me that you did not do this? If so, fine. That's just not how it sounded toward the end of the open house thread.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 8, 2006 5:49 PM

Get over it 5:49. She's a liar for the precise reasons you detailed. Mr. B busted her redhanded. I don't know how she sweet talked her way back here and frankly I don't care. All that matters is that she *was* posting under multiple names and doing her best to disrupt this blog. I guess it drives her batty that others might actually enjoy sharing a common interest here.

Posted by: Uwe at May 8, 2006 6:39 PM

Bx2Bklyn = PLG Fan

Posted by: Anonymous at May 8, 2006 7:31 PM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions