« Condo of the Day: Price Cut at 171 Greene Ave Tuesday On The Brooklyn Record »

May 22, 2007

House of the Day: 484 Macon Street

484maconstreet.jpg
Although we suspect this two-family brick is a bit overpriced, the brokers are not doing anyone any good (including themselves) by not including photos of the exterior, kitchen and bathrooms. Although it's on a land-marked block, 484 Macon Street is still about as far east as most Elliman clients are willing to go at this stage of the game. If you lure someone out there under false pretenses and then sucker-punch him with a dump of a kitchen, he's going to be pissed and never look at another listing of yours again. In this case, as the photo from Property Shark shows, the exterior (except for the windows) is perfectly attractive, so we're not sure why a broker wouldn't include a photo. Although the listing claims there's 2,295 square feet of living space, we'd guess that number's really south of 2,000, given that the mechanicals room is on the garden level. Anyway, what do people think of the $650,000 asking price? We think the number's more like $575,000 to $595,000 because we have no choice but to assume the worst about the parts of the house that aren't shown in the photos.
484 Macon Street [Douglas Elliman] GMAP P*Shark

484macon-fp.jpg




Posted by Brownstoner at 1:30 PM | Comments (30)
Categories: Bedford Stuyvesant, Brooklyn, HOTD, Real Estate

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/1215

Comments

Haven't seen it but a local broker told me that the house does not have a basement- absolutely no basement or cellar.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 1:57 PM

there's pics of the exterior there.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 1:58 PM

Mr. B, if you click on see all pictures, there are 2 photos of the exterior, as well as more detail pix of the interior.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 2:09 PM

READ BEFORE YOU POST!

browstoner found the exterior pic from property shark. the agent has no such picture on their site.

please, please read before you post. it is the reason many of the comment threads turn so exhausting.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 2:09 PM

ok sorry, my bad. i apologize 1:58.

although i'm guessing (perhaps incorrectly) that the agent put the pics up after hearing about bstoner's profile.

or maybe i've become too skeptical.

Posted by: anon at May 22, 2007 2:12 PM

Take your own advice, 2:09. Nobody said he didn't get the exterior photo from Property Shark. But if you go to the realtor's website, and click on View All Photos, there are 2 shots of the exterior, as well as a close up of a ceiling medallion. Whether they were there when Mr.B. initially posted, who knows, but they are there now, so the above comments are correct.

If you are going to get exasperated, find a good reason. Chill.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 2:33 PM

While very narrow, this is a cute house. It's great to have the extra windows on the top floor, although it cuts down on wall space. I'd have to have the whole house to myself in order to not feel squeezed into the duplex, but this would be a great starter house for a single person or couple.

I don't get what's going on in the extension, is it a closet, have stairs, or what?

As configured now, the top floor apt is very cramped. That hall bedroom is narrower than I am tall. I see they don't call any room a living room up there. I guess it would be just fine for one person, however.

As to the neighborhood, I'm not familiar with this block per se, but the neighborhood is very nice. Price seems ok, $595 would be better, of course. Unless unseen things are dreadfully wrong, I think it will sell.

Posted by: Sterling Silver at May 22, 2007 2:43 PM

At least Elliman posts floor plans, which puts them ahead of many brokers. Cute house. Would make a great 1-family. As a 2-family it would blow - unless perhaps you duplexed the top 2 floors, then reclaimed some space from the mechanical room and made the ground floor an eccentric studio (could work!). Present layout is not great. I like the area - close to Lewis Ave., Bread Stuy, etc.

Posted by: anonymous at May 22, 2007 2:52 PM

How the heck does the present layout work? Does the owner have to go out to the common stair to get downstairs to the kitchen? The layout plan implies that the ground floor is open to the whole house, except for the mechanical room. Is this really a legal two? Or was it setup as a mother/daughter arrangement?

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 3:06 PM

Mr. B, I don't really understand the comment that it's so far east. The house is an easy walk to the Utica Ave. stop of the A train (which has an entrance at Stuyvesant), therefore maybe 3-5 minutes further than Nostrand. Much better than living between the two express stops and being stuck waiting for the C train.

We moved from Clinton Hill, near the C, to Bed-Stuy, near the Nostrand stop on the A/C, and it takes a lot less time for us to get to Manhattan and back since there is an A train every few minutes, not like the 10-15-minute interval between C trains.

Also, the park at Fulton St. on the way to the subway is really lovely. It's not shown on the Google Maps site, but it's definitely there.

Posted by: rf at May 22, 2007 3:17 PM

hmm yes, is it legally a two-family? there is no CofO on the DOB website. interesting that there is a window into the mechanical room. the rear extension looks like steps up to ground-level. i bet this enhanced egress was required to legally consider the Garden Floor a Basement as opposed to a Cellar. sounds like you would have an uphill CofO battle trying to take the top-two floors and rent the garden floor http://www.nyc.gov/html/hpd/html/owners/illegal-conversions.shtml

Posted by: kanoa at May 22, 2007 3:21 PM

It's not that far east in absolute sense...The comment about it being far east was in the context of the general area served by Douglas Elliman and the area that most of its clients are probably considering buying, not a diss of this part of the Stuy. Compared to Clinton Hill or Fort Greene, it is pretty far east.

Posted by: Brownstoner at May 22, 2007 3:22 PM

O.K Mr. B now your pissing me off with your slang. May I suggest that you not go there in the future.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 3:55 PM

I live in the 'far east' and some folks would be surprised at the recent changes that have been taking place here. Some of the clients that Mr. B assumes have some trepidation at venturing out this way are doing themselve a disservice in terms of value for their $$$. As for the C train, it isn't so bad. I'll take a seat on a less frequent train over standing on a frequent sardine can. Although it is on the far east periphery of BS, it is actually one of the nicest parts of BS outside of the Heights. MacDonough, Macon, Decaur & Hancock are great streets all the way to Saratoga.

Posted by: P at May 22, 2007 4:30 PM

Cute little house, but the emphasis is on little.

The building is only 15.5' wide, and the square footage only adds up if you include the garden. Actual gross square footage (multiply building footprint by 3) is well south of 2,000 (as Brownstoner said), closer to 1,700. Actual net square footage (adding up room dimensions) is more along the lines of 1,400 sf or less.

Posted by: Halden at May 22, 2007 4:38 PM

This house is very cute and has potential but not at that price. The layout is very awkward, why would someone put their living space on a different floor as their kitchen?

Posted by: AnnaBea at May 22, 2007 4:42 PM

what's tha FAR? could someone add on to the top? also, what about the garages to the right in the picture? anyone know who owns those?

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 5:11 PM

I don't see how you could list this as 2200 sq ft

this has illegal conversion written all over it

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 5:16 PM

I've been in it - pretty unappealing and small. Has been on the market since late Jan or Early Feb.

Posted by: Mafew at May 22, 2007 5:50 PM

And no - the garage is not part of the lot.

Posted by: Mafew at May 22, 2007 5:51 PM

Have any of you priced apartments recently? This seems a good buy to me. The block is lovely, and transportation access is good. I haven't been in the house, but I've seen it from the outside. Three floors of living space, rental income and a garden are at that price represent a good value - no coop maintenance or condo fees to boot. There is a clear bias against bed-stuy on this site. Many posters just don't seem to think bed-stuy deserves the prices some areas can command. You doubters should take the bed-stuy house tour. The brownstones rival the nicest homes in park slope and in most neigbhorhoods in Manhattan.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 6:54 PM

Have you looked at the layout?
There is not three floors of living space.
The rental apartment is horrible at best and possibly illegal.
This is not a nabe dis, just a bad house.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 7:02 PM

This is not in the Stuyvesant Heights Historic District -- it's just outside it (on the other side of Stuyvesant Ave).

Posted by: babs at May 22, 2007 7:59 PM

You guys need to read and give the right facts of this property. Pleaseee check the facts before you make your comments. I have seen this house and it is a good house. It is in a very good location; but moreover, exterior and interior pics were always posted on the website. All of you should get a life.

Posted by: Local Broker at May 22, 2007 9:06 PM

Hey folks, why is it that when we discuss a three quarters of a million dollar condo in Ft. Greene, no one laughs at the price they're paying for one bedroom, but when we are talking about brownstones in Bed Stuy, suddenly everyone is in an uproar about square footage and blocks from the train stop?
I'll say it again, if people reading this blog about brownstones want to actually own a nice brownstone, then they will do like folks did in SOHO in the seventies and early eighties, buy whatever you can get your hands on and make the rest happen. No discussion about loft amenities or access to Dean and Deluca's. Just folks living their dream. And if your dream is to own a brownstone without having to wait for a rich uncle to croak or waiting to win the megamillions lottery, you will look into the only place left with an adequate stock of reasonably priced brownstones. Bedford Stuyvesant.

Posted by: Antoine Roquetin at May 22, 2007 11:10 PM

Bed-Stuy homes are beautiful. If I were out there buying for the first time I would definitely do what 11:10PM suggests above. The blocks are amazing. It's really a cohesive streetscape with row upon row of brownstones. And the families living there are very nice and welcoming. Go see for yourselves people. Reminds me of Park Slope. But with better subway service.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 23, 2007 6:59 AM

Agree with the last 2 posters. I wasn't a first time home buyer when I bought in Bed Stuy last year. I upgraded from a frame in Park Slope to a brownstone in Bed Stuy. I'm not the only one who left other nabes for greener pastures.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 23, 2007 8:14 AM

I live on this block, just a few houses over from 484. It was used as a two family until the owner wanted to sell. It's a really lovely little house, best used as a one-family, and depending upon kitchens/baths, $650k could be reasonable. However, something tells me the owner didn't do a lot of upgrading to the place, so perhaps $600k is more realistic. Also, our block is not landmarked, but it is "calendared" for landmark status. Finally, just a couple of houses down from this one, 488 Macon St is also for sale. It's a 4-storey brownstone, 20 ft wide, I think, and looks to be in pretty good shape.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 23, 2007 9:36 AM

how is living there with with PS262 on the same block? i believe it is a K-12?

Posted by: kanoa at May 23, 2007 3:39 PM

3.39 pm-- it's actually kind of nice. The school is PK through 5. Parking is no problem since the school takes the place of what would otherwise be a few more brownstones and with that, a few more cars (although you can't park in front of the school during school hours) and every morning there's a parade of little ones past my house with their cartoon character backpacks and parents in tow. During recess you can hear the kids playing outside, and if you happen to like the sound of kids running around and yelling and having a good time (some don't but I do), you'd find it charming. Also, the block gets special attention from from the likes of ConEd (i.e., busted streetlights--they fix them pretty quickly) probably because of the school. I like the block, and I think the school is definitely an asset.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 23, 2007 4:50 PM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions