« Top 50: The Final Wrap The View from the Edge »

October 27, 2008

The Clermont Reborn As Rentals

the-clermont-rentals-1008.jpg
The 52-unit new development at 375 Myrtle Avenue in Fort Greene known as The Clermont has had a tough go of it. Between opening for business last February and throwing in the towel last month, not a single unit just eights units went into contract. For reasons beyond us, the developers then tossed Corcoran over the side and went with an outfit called Ideal Properties to rent the place. There is a new website up but it doesn't have pricing info, so we went straight to the source. So far, they've only released six units: two one-bedrooms priced at $2,100 and $2,200; three two-bedrooms ranging from $2,800 to $3,500 and one three-bedroom for $3,650.
Zoinks! The Clermont Going Rental [Brownstoner] GMAP
The Clermont Condominium Open For Business [Brownstoner]
Streetlevel: Walgreens Signage at The Clermont [Brownstoner]
Development Watch: The Clermont Primps for Pre-Sales [Brownstoner]
Development Watch: The Clermont Revisited [Brownstoner]
Streetlevel: Walgreens Coming to Myrtle Avenue [Brownstoner]
Development Watch: The Clermont [Brownstoner]
New Development at Myrtle and Clermont Avenues [Brownstoner]




Posted by Brownstoner at 11:10 AM | Comments (35)
Categories: Clinton Hill, Rentals

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/6827

Comments

I foresee...Condo / Co-op of the day being replaced by 'Rental of the Day'

Posted by: bayridgegirl at October 27, 2008 11:20 AM

When is Walgreens opening?????????????????

Posted by: CHAOCguy at October 27, 2008 11:22 AM

I was interested in buying at the Clermont, but couldn't comprehend why they were charging $525k when comparable apartments at the Clinton Hill co-ops were selling for around $350k. I ended up purchasing in Park Slope.

Posted by: McFly at October 27, 2008 11:25 AM

Ideal Properties is the new real estate office on 7th avenue and Berkeley Place. I went by on opening night, talked to a few of the people who work there and was impressed with what they did to that formerly hideous space. I'd say they are a pretty great "outfit" from my limited experience with them so far.

I oftentimes take a look in the window of real estate companies, and I think the ones offered in the window of Ideal Properties look better than any other I've seen.

Posted by: 11217 at October 27, 2008 11:26 AM

Shill, baby shill!

Posted by: SnarkSlope at October 27, 2008 11:33 AM

the walgreens has been fully lit, fully stocked for the past 2 weeks...

why isn't it open?

Posted by: bklynbpr at October 27, 2008 11:49 AM

I second what 11217 said.

Posted by: lechacal at October 27, 2008 11:58 AM

I'm not a shill at all, just thought the comment about Ideal Properties made them sound like rotten eggs, when in actuality, I have a much higher regard (from what I've gathered) for them then I do for Corcoran (who I used for my apartment purchase).

Posted by: 11217 at October 27, 2008 12:04 PM

11217 - just messing with ya... Clermont probably dumped Corcoran since they so routinely overprice things, which does not seem the best strategy in today's market.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at October 27, 2008 12:07 PM

"For reasons beyond us, the developers then tossed Corcoran over the side and went with an outfit called Ideal Properties to rent the place."

For reasons beyond us? For reasons beyond us? Try: Corcoran mislead the developer into believing that their project would actually sell - they endlessly wasted the developer's time and showed blatant disrespect for their probably dwindling bank account. As you noted yourself, Corcoran never sold a single unit. Granted, I may be somewhat biased myself since I just rented an apartment from the outfit (idealpropertiesgroup.com) - but at least these people seem to know what they're doing. I just spoke to my agent - they rented quite a few units at Clermont... Some firms talk, others do.

Posted by: DKent at October 27, 2008 12:26 PM

I've always had my suspicion that this website was in bed with Corcoran. The "for reasons beyond us" comment pretty much solidified those feelings.

Posted by: 11217 at October 27, 2008 12:29 PM

Doesn't seem like Ideal is any great shakes either. The apartments aren't going to rent at those prices either.

Posted by: mattt at October 27, 2008 12:40 PM

11217, you may be onto something here...

Anyone remember this:

"Mr. Butler (READ: THE BRAIN BEHIND BROWNSTONER) and his wife of now nearly 10 years—they met through a Columbia classmate of hers—were hunting in Brooklyn, a borough they’d moved to in late 2003, settling initially in Williamsburg with the first of their two children, now ages 2 and 4. Mr. Butler had spent his entire adult life below 23rd Street in Manhattan (except for one ill-fated year, he said, back on the Upper East Side).

Through a Corcoran Group listing, the couple found a Clinton Hill brownstone for under $1 million. It has five floors, 14-foot ceilings in the parlor and nine fireplaces, none of which work. Mr. Butler explained that the brownstone, at least 130 years old, needed a lot of renovations—it had been an S.R.O. before they bought it—and the fireplace repairs fell beyond their budget."

Posted by: DKent at October 27, 2008 12:44 PM

Did any of the alleged eight actually sell?

Posted by: DKent at October 27, 2008 1:23 PM

Per Streeteasy: "Units originally offered for sale are now available as rentals only."

Posted by: SnarkSlope at October 27, 2008 1:44 PM

Revisited the Clermont Condos turned Rentals this weekend. The bamboo floor as well as the hallway carpeting looks cheap to me. For the price it lacks an expensive feel and the Manhattan side views are nothing special although a nearby school will ensure the airspace remains open. The apartments have a washers and dryers. While the building is complete, the inside needs a good cleaning for occupancy.

The agents reported approximately 15 of approximately 52 units would be occupied as of November 1 and the rest hopefully in December. They were only offering one-year leases. The agent said Walgreens was supposed to open Friday but did not.

Posted by: Greeny at October 27, 2008 2:36 PM

There is a sign on the door at Walgreens that says: "Walgreens will be opening soon. Sorry." Lame.

Posted by: brooklynfamily at October 27, 2008 3:10 PM

These are actually a better bargain and a better neighborhood than the MYNT

Posted by: 7andfive at October 27, 2008 4:57 PM

I am waiting on that Walgreens!

Posted by: greenebee at October 27, 2008 5:19 PM

I have lived on this block for three years. These units were overpriced as Condo's and are now over priced as rentals. The hood is decent but Myrtle gets very noisy. The walk to the subway is very long. The public school is safe but noisy.

Walgreen's has been saying they are going to open "next Friday" for at least 2 months.

Clermont Greene Condos, between Myrtle and Willoughby is even more overpriced. I can not see any of this inventory moving in the current environment.

Posted by: leftmanhattanneverlookedback at October 27, 2008 5:50 PM

Greeny, wonder where exactly in Brooklyn you'd get an expensive looking bamboo floor for that rent. As a matter of fact, I wonder where in the world you's get an expensive looking bamboo floor in a rental building...

They already rented 15??? Not an entirely bad number for a freaked out rental market, and in just a few weeks since the place has gone rental.

You go, outfit!

Posted by: DKent at October 27, 2008 7:24 PM

So far, they've only released six units: two one-bedrooms priced at $2,100 and $2,200; three two-bedrooms ranging from $2,800 to $3,500 and one three-bedroom for $3,650.

Can we say "bubble rents?" I knew we could :)

Rule of thumb, housing prices should ONLY be 3x median neighborhood income and rental prices should be now more than 1/3 of take home pay (of median income).

In NYC, median income is about 65k so home/condo prices should average around 195k and rental prices about 1k monthly. People that go out of their way to pay these ridicules 2k + rents do so with roommates and are inherently unstable tenants or young. The rental market in NYC is in yet another massive bubble that will also collapse in a few years time.

Posted by: nes718 at October 27, 2008 8:27 PM

Seems like a few of the eager Corcoran agents opened their brand new Brownstoner accounts today? Could it be Brownstoner tipped them off? Sought help? No comments from nes718, Greeny, even leftmanhattanneverlookedback, on anything, ever, except for this project, today? Hmmm... sounds like the la-la-stoner land of coincidences at its best.

As a local boutique realtor, I decided to tell this revered source of 718 R.E. info to call off the dogs. After all, why would Corcoran be deemed better, just because Brownstoner happens to like Corcoran better?

C'mon nes718 - you can't be serious, not even for a second - generic NYC rent guidelines and your generic rules of thumb don't apply (and have not applied for the longest of times) to Brooklyn market. Any a decent 718 would agree.

Posted by: softlayer1 at October 27, 2008 11:10 PM

We checked out the apts a couple of evenings ago since we're in the market to rent in the area. Some not all are pretty nice. Def expensive. The broker at Ideal said that there were only 8 vacancies and all had been rented. That's a pretty shadey thing to do if they haven't been able to rent more than 6-15 out of the 52. Makes me glad we decided against it. Just for the record I have no experience with Cocoran. But in general I think brokers need to be held responsible for such dishonest behavior.

Posted by: anon718 at October 28, 2008 11:37 AM

anon718, despite disavowing connection, you sound like corcoran to me... lame.

Posted by: softlayer1 at October 28, 2008 8:17 PM

We are renting one of these apartments although I'm beginning to have second thoughts. Ideal Properties have not so far covered themselves in glory. Indeed, we're still waiting for a signed contract to be returned to us. We too were given the impression that there were only a handful of these units left but that clearly doesn't seem to be the case. I will post more on this article shortly....

Posted by: spoons99 at October 29, 2008 10:16 AM

spoons99 we have acquaintenances that ended up renting and our also having second thoughts. same thing - no lease and told them that there were only 8 vacancies. keep me posted on what you decide and i'll be happy to put you in touch with them.

as for softlayer1's comment, the whole point of my post was to say i mistrust brokers - whether they be cocoran or any other.

Posted by: anon718 at October 29, 2008 12:57 PM

Hey no fair. Corcoran was there for me when I bought my place -- let's see, my broker was there for me when she sent me listings like 3 times over the course of 5 months and then she was there again at closing to pick up the check for her points on the deal.

Posted by: davide5 at October 30, 2008 11:33 PM

annon718, you sure you have acquaintances who rented in the building? my brother rented here; they got their lease on time; and they were told there were only 8 apartments READY FOR OCCUPANCY (not as you were informed 8 vacancies) for nov 1.

maybe you should all double-check your sources (that is if you're not all in fact corcoran brokers) before you make a jump at the keyboard?

Posted by: Ijosephaaronow at November 3, 2008 6:51 PM

annon718, you sure you have acquaintances who rented in the building? my brother rented here; they got their lease on time; and they were told there were only 8 apartments READY FOR OCCUPANCY (not as you were informed 8 vacancies) for nov 1.

maybe you should all double-check your sources (that is if you're not all in fact corcoran brokers) before you make a jump at the keyboard?

Posted by: Ijosephaaronow at November 3, 2008 6:53 PM

and my brother said they were told by the building's management that NONE of the apartments were sold. one was in contract, and the buyer backed out.

Posted by: Ijosephaaronow at November 3, 2008 6:55 PM

and my brother said they were told by the building's management that NONE of the apartments were sold. one was in contract, and the buyer backed out.

Posted by: Ijosephaaronow at November 3, 2008 6:56 PM

did i mention my brother's apartment was beautiful? and a great deal compared to anything in the building's vicinity? fifth floor, great views, gym, loads of windows, even his own parking spot! and you should see the appliances! this building was definitely built for sales originally - and he gets to rent it for a lot less than a mortgage would have cost him!

Posted by: Ijosephaaronow at November 3, 2008 6:59 PM

anon718 - decide which: you checked out apartments @ clermont yourself, or you had your "acquaintances" do it... seems to me like a load of bull on both counts.

First you say: "We checked out the apts a couple of evenings ago since we're in the market to rent in the area..." then you go on to claim that you "have acquaintenances that ended up renting and our also having second thoughts.."

are you really, really sure you're not corcoran? i honestly doubt it.

Posted by: softlayer1 at November 3, 2008 8:35 PM

Quick update: you folks @ Brownstoner are wrong. Found this website....
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/375-myrtle-avenue-brooklyn
Apparently, none of the apts ever went into contract, let alone sold. And my brother confirmed this. Everyone living in the building rents their apt.

Posted by: Ijosephaaronow at January 4, 2009 4:27 AM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions