House of the Day: 52 South Oxford Street

I like this House Looks great on the Outside and The interior is great.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 1:42 PM

$2.1 million

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 1:42 PM

I think it will sell for ask.

6000 sf is a ton. Great location too. One of the best.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 1:49 PM

Forget the unfortunate facade of its two neighbors. Its own skin ain't too purdy either.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 1:50 PM

The details are there but don't underestimate the cost of renovating a place like this that likely has not had major improvements to plumbing, electricty, etc. for years. If you're trying to save the old details while doing that stuff, it makes the process even more expensive.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 1:51 PM

$995k.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 1:54 PM

How about slapping a cornice on that thing.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:01 PM

that wouldn't be "contextual" with the eye-sores on either side of it!

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:05 PM

Then how about perching a couple if pink flamingos on that roof line.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:09 PM

what does SRO mean? what do you have to do to convert it to a 1 or 2 family house?

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:11 PM

have to get a certificate of non harassment, which is at least a 6 month process.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:15 PM

SRO - single resident occupancy.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:20 PM

The owner's triplex includes the cellar? Most cellars in these types of houses have dirt floors.
Realtors have no shame.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:34 PM

Can someone explain the SRO thing? Does "single resident occupancy" mean that this is a 1-family home?

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:44 PM

no--it's a rooming house where rooms are rented out individually with shared bathrooms on the hall. a vestige of the area's less flush times. residents of SROs are protected like rent control tenants and are rather difficult to get rid of. and once the house is empty, you then have to prove that you didn't illegally displace any of the tenants. the city sends out letters and investigators to try to chase down former tenants and make sure they weren't forced out against their will. meanwhile, your monthly mortgage payments are due and you can't get a DOB permit. great stuff.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:49 PM

2:44: if you're so desperate to know, there's this thing called the Internet? GOOGLE IT.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:50 PM

It will take about a year to renovate the house so waiting six months for the single room occupancy letter of non-harassment should not be a big deal if done concurrent with the work.
But if there is a former tenant who comes out of the woodwork to say they were harassed, then you have a Kafkaesque nightmare on your hands.
That's why buying these sro's are problemtic except for the biggest developers who have a stable of attorneys at the ready.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 2:52 PM

Many of these old neighborhoods went directly from the SRO flea-bag hotel period to the millionaires-only period. As usual in NYC, the working middle class (teachers, cops, nurses, civil servants etc etc) were left in the dust. But that is why God, in his wisdom, invented the suburbs, where ordinary people can live as well or better, than the millionaires in their musty old brownstones with cranky renters sharing the house.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 3:03 PM

Sounds a nicer than bed stuy.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 3:15 PM

I know what I think is nicer in the same way that you know what its like to live in the suburbs!!

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 3:27 PM

I commuted for a while and actually I didn't mind it. it was kind of nice. I would prefer to buy a brownstone in Park Slope or Carrol Gardens than a house in the burbs, but financially, I can't dream of it.
Some of the towns in Nassau County are kinda cute. Prices are really soft there now too. So, anyway, not all of us were lucky enough to buy ten years ago. Today the prices in the brownstone neibs are out of control.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 3:31 PM

whoa dave. time to take it down a notch. this is a BLOG. relaxxxxxx.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 3:37 PM

Dave, my point was that if you can wax poetic about how you think the suburbs and the people who live in them are of a lower order than those who live in brownstone Brooklyn (which is what your post implied) then I can spout off about how some people might actually prefer the suburbs to bed stuy.

I live in Brooklyn in a brownstone that I own, but that really has nothing to do with anything.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 3:47 PM

Daveinbedstuy -- quickly rising to the top of most self-satisfied and annoying commenters on this blog.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 3:52 PM

No, it still wouldn't be worth 2.5. There are several other 5 stories on the market, some also wide, all with some to a lot of original detail. Most are listed between 2M and 2.25M. None of them are selling.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 4:26 PM

I actually know one of the tenants in this building. Not sure it's really for sale though...

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 6:32 PM

Someone above made a comment that SROs in FG went from being SROs to being millionaires' homes in one leap.

Now...houses that were SROs *were* bought up in the past and changed around pretty easily …at one time…but because of the wave of conversions and tenants being booted out, the City brought in the SRO "moratorium" which is the legacy we are living with.

Because of the process, these buildings are not converted overnight into millionaires' townhouses. Many SROs have gone through long periods with various permutations...(right on South Oxford in a very nice house down the block from the said-façaded HOTD the SOR tenant lived for years basically IN the couples home who took over everything around the tenant’s small apartment.

SROs often did not have any cooking in the rooms, just a bedroom with a shared bathroom on the floor or the next floor up or down. I had a musician friend who lived in a Manhattan SRO for years, and she had a hotplate, etc. I think there was some sort of reg that allowed people to have these even though they heightened the risk of fire.

Back in the day when you could manage to eat “decent” lunches and dinners at lunch counters and diners, a time way before going out for a just-okay, rather blah meal would be $30-50/person like it now is, many respectable working people lived in SROs, rooming houses, were lodgers. They didn’t expect, couldn’t afford, or need, to have individual refrigerators/iceboxes or cooking facilities. Food delivery was quite different 70 to 50 years ago in NYC.

These days, in relation to income left over after paying for housing, and many other things NYC residents now spend on that they did not spend on through the mid-20th Century, “grabbing a bite” for someone who was a boarder or in an SRO in, say, 1948 was relatively less of that persons disposable income compared with working people today. I believe that historically, food costs were more of a households expenses but still, eating out was just part of the daily grind.

Plus, so many men living on their own, they were not expected to cook for themselves so either had board were they lodged or ate out.

So back to the story of this house:

Used to be that FG had a LOT of boarders/lodgers in the days the Navy Yards served as shipyards. By the 1940's and 1950's the "SRO" was brought in and townhouse owners were obliged to run sprinkler systems up the staircases. (and yes…not a few of the buildings became flog houses…)

Because of the requirement to install sprinklers, many houses got their first (often only) plans ever filed with the City. Plumbers filed their work leaving us with something to look at when we go downtown and "pull the plans". 3-family-and-up houses required sprinklers as well but I believe this code came in later. Someone reading this can probably inform us.

If houses remained one- or two-family, they didn't necessarily ever have drawings filed. Sometimes houses went beyond the legal 2-family limit but sailed under the radar and the house didn't get a sprinkler system either (much like the non-documented "basement" conversions in Astoria which turn 2-family houses into 3-families which usually don't get any sprinklers installed.)

I personally really dislike sprinkler systems in townhouses. They really depress me. You have an expensively done-up owner duplex, sometimes triplex, and ugly pipes down the staircases and in the hallways.

So, normally, this house should go for noticeably less than the market for a 5-story S. Oxford house. If there are tenants in the house right now… Going through the legal process and paying off tenants and former tenants is just the cost of doing business and would have to be factored into the purchase costs. And, of course, this house is now stunner from the curb. What with the ugly façades on either side…it’s kind of too bad.

It is depressing what happened to this whole string of townhouses on S. Oxford. They got SOOOO uglified with the brick-facing. Really depressing. One is owned by a lady (Ms. I.). It had a fire 30 years ago and she has had (or had and finished with) a long battle with the insurance company. She lets it sit there empty and derelict. I take it the insurance will never come through. Miss I. actually owns other properties and is apparently VERY well-set…but she is famous for collecting cans from the recycling bins…and people put them out in separate bags on their railings for her. Little do they know… She tells everyone it is her Atlantic City money. And I believe it really is! FG still has its charm. I love it!

I keep hoping some starry-eyed someone will buy one or more of these brick-faced South Oxford houses and have the façade(s) put back right. With windows reconfigured back, new “brownstoning”, a cornice and possible a stoop and iron work, what would a full restoration cost?

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 7:26 PM

Sorry, left out some apostrophes and "flog" (!) should have been "flop"! hahahah...

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 7:47 PM

While the houses on either side of the House of the Day are not pretty, they are people's homes and are probably more affordable than most similarly situated and sized homes in FG. So, we can have love of architecture and pretty buildings (I do), but we have to recognize that if someone buys these uglier homes and makes them easier on the eye, people get displaced. Aesthetics vs. affordability. I'd like to see them both happen in the same place.

My partner lived for years in an SRO in FG that was kept in decent shape only by the tenants. It's still a very affordable place to live. I'd rather it stay shabby and affordable than have a single family take it over for a beautiful rehab.

E.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 8:35 PM

Thank you Nokilissa,

I know how you feel. That heavily commented thread for the apartment in BH (over 100 comments, no?) became tiresome quickly. There have been some really hot topic threads at times cresting at 300 comments...maybe fewer now that the market has slowedddd dddownnnn.

At least we can see the quick change in tenor from last year when we had to read the "my kitchen's way cooler than your's!" features and the ensuing fights and rows in the comments! Hahahaha!

Our house in FG has some ghosts. We have neighbors who have been in their house since the early 50's so I know of the people who used to live in the house...and then by chance, we recently came across the information about a dentist who owned the house in the late 1800's. I can't imagine all the pain the patients went through in that house back then. I certainly hope it is not reverberating still!!!

Anyway, we narrowed some of the period redos (house is from mid-1800's and the dentist came later) down to the dentist wanting to update the house into a "modern" look which explains the neo-grecque woodwork added to a romantic Italianate house.

Kind of interesting...I guess...

Found an old, pale blue, elixir/medecine bottle from the 1800's a couple weekends ago in the backyard. I don't, for the life of me, know how it had gone unnoticed. I think it must have been slowly forced up through the soil by tree roots and finally had an edge washed clean by rain.

Yes, I really like living in Brooklyn. There you go.

And thanks to the Flea, BAM (love it or hate it) and other things, we in FG are A LOT more on the map than 10 years ago. I always laugh when the double-decker tourist bus goes driving by!

Unfortunately, there are ties with the 1800's that are dying away. People who are older now had grandparents who were born when some of our houses were new (!)--espeically all those "newer" houses in PS from the 1870's and 1880's... [I wonder if by slipping that reference to PS in we'll get a row going...ya' think?...shhhh...]

In fact, my great-aunt who is very, very aged now, when she was little knew her great-grandmother (who hugged a doll and rocked in a chair all day long and passed away at the age of 106). This great-grandmother was born just after Napoleon's fall! I kind of feel that being with my great-aunt is like reaching back in time...I guess it kind of is.

I get tired reading these threads with all the back-and-forth know-it-alls fighting over "historical" house prices and "the last major recession" when they were only 6 years old at that time...or whatever. It's sometimes a little like, and as absurd as, the rather fresh-faced 28-year-old talking heads from the major financial "institutions" blabbing at a stationary camera in the AM for CNBC when they're talking about historical trends, "back in '82" (often before their birth but talking about it like they lived the period as an adult), or even, more horrific but catching on and making me mad: "back in 2004" I mean, come on!!! I think I even heard "back in 2006" the other day...hhh...

I guess it par for the course...as you get older it all seems so silly out there. At least I enjoy my late day reading of some of the stuff Brownstoner and Company puts up on the site.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 8:35 PM

"going out for a just-okay, rather blah meal would be $30-50/person"

Say what?

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 8:36 PM

E.,
The houses on either side of the HOTD are apartments. Much of S. Oxford is still apartments. Not everything has been turned into a single family home...don't fret. Most of what happened since I've been in FG is that affordable apartments had their rent jacked up and the tenants were displaced for tenants who could pay the crazy-rent. Also, any place that was coop or condo got churn so if an apartment was rented out, the owner selling that apartment would ask the tenant to leave.

Then again, there were some lots that remained unbuilt and some houses that were empty for many years well into the 90's. Either they were flipped in the 80's too much and someone got burned or they had other issues. There are now very, very few open lots anywhere which has added living space...and yes, it's arguable what was added benefitted many.

I have to say, on both facing sides of our block, occupancy has not changed very much at all. There was some reconfiguring (by a current owner who still lives with family and boarders in the house). And a building that was mysteriously empty, though renovated, for a decade it seemed, got tenants in the late 90's...I think the apartments were actually sold. I can't say that FG has been that depopulated...yes, there has been displacement, but it seems like there are a lot of people nonetheless...and a lot of the houses are still rundown inside. If they're rentals, they are often still pretty cruddy. It's the full renos that get all the Benjamin Moore and skim-coating!

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 8:46 PM

Okay...so you can have a meal for $20 with the tax and tip but not in too many places these days. If you go to places that even have the slightest veneer of anything, you've got entrees at $15 to $25. Or, if you have a burger with a beer it's $19.99 with the tax and tip...come on...that's on the low side. Be real.

Where are you going to go in FG for less? Even nothing meals in other nabes in NYC end up costing $30/person. It all adds up very quickly.

With friends visiting from abroad a couple of weeks ago we had a $60 coffee break/snack at the cafe across from St. John the Divine just for a pee-pee break basically (plus the car was $15 plus tip to park for the 45 minutes or whatever it was). Then a late lunch in Chelsea by the galleries and eventually dinner...Look, it all adds up.

The minute you have a drink or a glass of wine even at a "cheap" place, fuggehdaboudit...it adds up.

Even in Middle America, meals out are not dirt cheap any longer.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 8:57 PM

Seven years ago we bought a 2-fam. in Park Slopre which had been a SRO (we think) and had neither a CO nor a CNH.

Had no problems with finance, or re-fi two years later. We did quite a bit of renovation w/o worrying about the city.

Are we worried about the remote chance that we can get caught up in the CNF hassle? No.

I guess ignorance is bliss.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 8:57 PM

Of course it's not as hopping...but that's okay. It was neurotic for a while there in the US and NYC. I couldn't take the frenetic, edginess with the real estate craze going on. It was kind of revolting.

Now it is simmering down and will maybe even be depressed and we'll be able to refocus on other things.

I hope.

Who knows if readership is down. It just seems there are fewer posts that get people's ire up enough to bother commenting. It seems the fights over "my nabe is better than yours", "my kitchen counter is cooler than yours", and "my friends' recent bid they were outbid on is more fabulous than yours" is over.

People are giving up the battle because they realize it no longer seems winnable. The hot air is escaping the balloon. I worked at a major corporation (L*****) while it scaled the heights and then plunged down the other side. It was depressing...there were only pushed voices to be heard during the bad times when it was all boisterousness and light during the rah-rah good times.

But, there are lots of other things going on in Brooklyn nonetheless. Let's hope this real estate bubble doesn't sour everything for most people. Most of us are still standing, we have responsibilities: childcare, eldercare, self-care, hobbies, jobs (for now), interests, neighbors and neighborhoods, community gardens... there is other stuff to focus on that doesn't rely on money and real estate values.

Brownstoner and Co. are already tryin to focus the blog on a lot more than just real estate...unless it's my imagination. It seems it has focused away from RE and toward lots of other things.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 9:12 PM

You can convert an SRO, as described above--however the problem is getting a bank to finance it. It wasn't easy a year ago and I'd bet it's near impossible these days, with the banks cracking down on every type of mortgage. If you can pay cash, you'll get a deal on this house.

Where to eat in Ft Greene for under $10? Little Piggy Market or Rice.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 9:18 PM

So, 8:57, you did "quite a bit of reno." and didn't get it permitted ("worrying about the city")! If you're in PS, I'm shocked no one called in.

You mean to tell us, you got a first mortgage and refied and no one mentioned anything about it having been an SRO? The documents had to list the CoO status all over the place....It must have been an SRO a rather long time ago and de-SRO'd way before you're tenure in the house!

I mean, your property tax status is based on this! The "class" of your building is on your tax statement I believe. Hhhhmmmm...

Strange...

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 9:19 PM

That's "hushed voices", not "pushed voices".

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 9:22 PM

Rice is lousy.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 9:28 PM

Lil' Piggy is a cheap date with a heart attack.

Posted by: guest at April 29, 2008 9:50 PM

I, too, know someone who lives in this building. Is it true that a certificate of non-harassment would be all that would be required to vacate the building? This person never signed anything to that effect; does that make a difference?

Posted by: guest at April 30, 2008 1:04 AM

4:26 - can you show me the five-story places that are sitting on the market on not selling for $2MM - I think I might be interested in them.

Posted by: guest at April 30, 2008 9:22 AM

9:22 Look in the Times. There's one Prospect pl. still listed for more, one on Lefferts Pl., and one in Clinton Hill on maybe St. James? There are others too, but this should be a start.

Posted by: guest at April 30, 2008 12:17 PM

12:17 I have. Everything in the price range mentioned are four story houses, and they're in MUCH less desirable areas. You honestly can't compare South Oxford on the park versus Lefferts Place. If someone really knows about a 5-story in prime Fort Greene sitting for around $2MM, I really would be interested to hear about it.

Posted by: guest at April 30, 2008 1:16 PM

Here is some more info. I am in the process of renovating a former SRO. It took the owner 8 month to get the Certificate of Non-harassment, and the house was already empty. Yes, tenants do have to sign to get the CONH, but they don't have to sign if they don't want to. Also, you do not get a residential mortgage for an SRO, because you can't change the status until you actually do a renovation or file. In the meantime, you get a construction loan. These can be harder to get. So, unless a property is already vacant, and has the CONH filed, I would be very wary.

Owners always think they can deliver properties vacant, but usually they can't.

Posted by: guest at April 30, 2008 1:20 PM

1:16 If you want that street and only that street, make an offer on this house. If you only want fort greene, it's a tiny few blocks, so again make an offer on this house. But given that 5 stories are sitting at prices like this and lower in nabes that many people do find to be acceptable, I wouldn't pay this ask. I also suggest you check the Times again because as I wrote above there are others.

Posted by: guest at April 30, 2008 1:35 PM

Thanks 3:18. This house obviously has other issues with it as an SRO - but these people that just make random statements about value without any evidence are just beyond annoying. Please 1:35/1:16, just show me one (or the many as you claim) example of the $2MM five-story places in comparable (price-wise, not your judgment-wise) neighborhoods - I really and truly would love to see them.

If these houses at these prices really exist on the Times website, then perhaps I just don't know how to search correctly - but, since you think they do (and, to actually think that, you must have been on the site), please just send me the link.

Posted by: guest at April 30, 2008 3:56 PM

Thanks, 1:20. Very good to know. -1:04 a.m.

Posted by: guest at April 30, 2008 6:14 PM

"Some good posts in this thread.
Posted by: Polemicist at April 30, 2008 9:24 AM"

Polemicist, coming from you that is a real compliment! I hope you were referring to my comments! Where you been?

Nokilissa, if you're still checking back, I would love you to hook us up with any friends you have who want to buy a 4-story FG prime location house that needs some (a lot?) work. We are thinking of selling and permanently moving our lives more to our other place (we live between two East Coast cities) and only renting something in Brooklyn.

I don't want to list the place but would prefer a FSBO, low key deal, not a long string of endless open houses because Corcoran or some other outfit overpriced our house. I would rather sell at a moderate price and get on with life. Who needs to overprice a house to get only a couple of bids and then battle it out with the buyers, a lawyer couple or whatever. Peace of mind is valuable.

A couple of Fort Greene neighbors with houses like ours are still trying to get top dollar (noticeably north of 2m for a 4-story house) and they're sittin'. Hhhh...seems like KorKordumb can't let go of their overpricing reflex. These houses have been sitting for some time and have had near misses (in contract but some glitch ends the deal).

Oh well...I guess we can ride out the downturn and if real estate rises in 10 years (it may not...yikes!) will be able to sell and move to a grape ranch or cohousing community in the country or somesuch. I'll be too old at that point I'll bet to start that farm I dream about!

Posted by: guest at April 30, 2008 8:35 PM

Nokilissa,
Okay, I'll write this weekend. It is really crazy at the beginning of a month for me (when is not busy, right?)!
I hope you're thinking of renovating! (or at least finishing one...)
What have your house search parameters been?

Posted by: guest at May 1, 2008 6:45 PM

"...though I'm reasonably certain that no one else is coming back to this old thread to read what we're saying!"

...who knows...only Brownstoner and co. do...I'm sure there are all them lurkers reading our conversation too!...yikes! ;-)

Anyway, we'll email this weekend.

I'm just curious, why are you guys are so keen on FG? Are you renters in FG already? From what you wrote it does not appear to be so. Do you have good friends here? That is often the way people get introduced to the nabe. Is it just the convenience (esp. subways), certain amenities (way fewer than PS or course, but BAM is close), and the scale and look of the neighborhood that attracted you?

I'm sorry you haven't found anything as yet. What about buying a duplex in a townhouse?

I guess it's a small neighborhood so not too many things come on the market. There's more in Clinton Hill but there a huge difference in terms of access to subways. I don't care how much anyone touts CH. I think some of it is very pleasant but it is too poorly served by subways, end of story. If you drive or bike everywhere I guess it’s not such a big issue. I would rather live in genteel poverty in FG than genteel poverty in CH.

Listen, if you guys end up living in FG, I wouldn't worry or be too self-conscious about ruining any vibe. Trust me...don't worry about it. You hardly sound like you and the family would be some sort of shocker! ;-)

From my perspective I see the benefits of living in Park Slope and some of them living in FG (oops! I hope no one comes back to start a fight between PS and FG on this thread! But wouldn't that be funny?!). I'm a member of the PSFC and wouldn't mind being nearer as well as to nearer to the "residence" (assisted living) where my almost-90 y.o. great-aunt is headed soon...but parking is brutal in PS and there are fewer train options...and WAY more ways to spend money which is a curse... ;-)...and yes, some "annoying" people, I guess, but "whatever"--that is way, way overblown.

I like FG probably mostly because I'm simply used to it and inertia is easy. I have my roses and grapes out back (though getting more and more shaded by a growing tree, community garden and friends there, neighbors, some good friends, the park, farmers market (much more friendly than Grand Army Plaza’s), BAM (which I used to go to non-stop but got turned off), thinking about doing classes at Urban Glass...

Who knows. I keep thinking that if we do decide to sell I'd almost rather end up in some rental or coop in FG than elsewhere. Don't know if there's anything really that decent though to rent and as convenient as our current location. I just don't like the idea of having to walk block after block at night from the subway--I get car sick in cabs and towncars when they speed across the Manhattan Bridge after they’ve already barreled down to Canal. In fact, I got kind of seasick the other night in a cab…I’m kind of joking and kind of not (!). Anyway, right now we're convenient. Really prime FG convenience-wise and NOT south of Fulton but in landmarked FG. Thinking of moving half time out of NYC, I still would want a place just a couple blocks from the subway if we stayed in FG.

We had friends visiting from Switzerland last month (I'm still exhausted!) and took them everywhere including the Promenade for the kids of course. The kids were less enthused than the parents in the end. Anyway, we really went around NYC and I got a bit of a feeling for nabes I hadn't spent much time in for ages (or ever)

I realized that BH is a just too austere emotionally (in fact, it’s blechy on that level…the residents eye you with suspicion!). PS is a lot more relaxed but can be pointy, edgy and kind of big-city-ish. It definitely feels like NYC. When we got back to FG, I found it the most welcoming and easy-going. It somehow feels like a village. I guess it has a little lower density than the commercial drags in PS..dunno…and there’re all the 20-somethings making it feel more exciting and buoyant (and not to the extreme as in WB where I feel like I’m some sort of social pariah or a freak dropped in from another planet).

This was hardly a controlled study of course! I mean, I'm biased. It's just that I feel FG is more relaxed (I'm still a touch nervous walking home on Cumberland the one block from the subway at night...probably needlessly nervous)...and even though I don't feel as nervous in PS at night on, say, 7th Avenue, I find the neighborhood a bit impersonal with too many people periodically flowing out of the 7th Avenue station like a damn opening the sluice gates from time to time.

I used to live on the UES and I grew to h-a-t-e it. I love the park and certain "things", but hate it generally.

Oh, yes, and we took our fiends to the Cloisters (like they really needed to see that coming from Europe...though Geneva is rather blah and not like other cities with lots of gothic). I thought it’d be less pressure than the Met for the kids but the café wasn’t open as yet which was a m-a-j-o-r bummer for them. The Cloisters has some famous masterpieces ..probably one of the top 5 Flemish paintings in the world and you can get up close to it...I always like going there.

Anyway, as we left the Cloisters we got kind of turned around (I'm a terrible back seat driver) and ended up a little detoured in the neighborhood just south of the Cloisters' main entrance. I have to say the square we drove around had a lot of charm. It's probably a nice place to live. Who knows where to live these days. I keep thinking of heading to the country though there are readers on this blog who write that the urban setting is the only way to go (Yes, you, Mr. Polemicist! You!)…I’m not so sure about that; at least not for me.

I feel lucky to live in FG when I see the visual atrocities in NYC, the indifferent dry-walled apartments in Manhattan, insta-condos and, of course, the poverty and suffering in so many places.

We’ll talk.

Posted by: guest at May 1, 2008 11:21 PM

Yes, I will write. Solly. Weekend was hectic. I finally made it to the "Flea" and, of course, managed to spend dough...impulse buy for which I will "have to hear it" ("Why do you have to bring more stuff into this house?").

Did you check out any FG open houses?

Posted by: guest at May 5, 2008 5:50 PM

I used to live in this building in the early 90's. The owner was a delightful lady named Pearl; I believe she inherited it from her parents. I had the room at the back on the 2nd floor and most of the original details were intact, including a marble fireplace with a fantastic cast iron firebox that looked vaguely like a suit of armor. I'm pretty sure it did have sprinkler pipes on the ceilings. The building was shabby and in need of a new roof & windows, but it was always kept clean-- I remember a Polish woman used to come in every other weekend and scrub the stairs & hall floors on her hand & knees (I can still smell the cloying lemon scent of Murphy's Wood Soap). The brass statue pictured in one of the photos used to be mounted on the newel post in the foyer. I've been in many buildings on South Oxford & South Portland, and this one has more original detail intact than most. Too bad about the facade.

Posted by: guest at May 19, 2008 2:44 AM