220greeneave0707.jpg
Long-time readers will remember that the bane (alright, one of the banes) of our existence is a shockingly ugly two-family building at 220 Greene Avenue that was completed early last year. The middle-finger to the neighborhood sat on the market for several months before finally selling last October for an eye-popping $1,250,000. Perhaps suffering from a case of buyer’s remorse, the new owner dangled the property back on the market just three months later for what would have been a money-losing $1,200,000 before finding some renters to move in. Since then, the presence of the new building effectively sabotaged the sale of the lot next door, which was came on the market back in February for $650,000 and has since been reduced to $583,000. (Presumably it’s worth even less now under the new zoning.) Anyway, the current owner of Number 220 is now trying to unload the building for a whopping $1,400,000, a price made all the more surprising by the fact that, according to the new listing, at least one of the two units is occupied by Section 8 tenants who we can’t imagine are paying enough to cover the mortgage. At least the owner’s upgraded from a Craigslist bottom-feeder who misrepresented the property last time around with fake photos to a broker at Fillmore who may not realize quite what a tough sale he’s signed on for.
220 Greene Avenue, Listing #738098 [Fillmore] GMAP P*Shark
Actually, Greene Avenue Atrocity IS for Sale [Brownstoner]
Lot for Sale: Don’t Mind the POS Next Door [Brownstoner]


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. “Perseverate”? Nice “word”!

    It is extremely valuable to critique new buildings in Brooklyn, good and bad. A lot of people read this site. It can’t hurt to have a dialogue among a large group of passionate people about these aesthetic issues. And yeah, if we manage to bankrupt just one asshole who builds this kind of shit, the world will be a better place.

  2. “How about doing one of those architectural makeovers the Times was running for a while? Maybe if all the homeowners within a three block radius kicked in $100 we could help the owner at least fix the exterior.”

    Just a hunch, but most of the interest re-dos of this building would involve chopping out a lot of square feet — this idea tends to be a non-starter for owners obsessed with their square foot numbers.

    Just reworking the facade would be lipstick on a pig, IMO.

    –an architect in Brooklyn

  3. You know there isn’t a damn thing you can do about the building of ugly buildings in Brooklyn, is there? This is probably the thousandth brownstoner post of new ugly buildings. So in lieu of effective action or advocacy of any sort, Brownstoner perseverates in posting on architectural uglies for what reason? To give people a opportunity for a free for all mudball throw. To make it harder to sell it? To mock the builders? If you had some ulterior positive motive except self indulgent self congratulation, this kind of post would be easier to take.

    And do you really think the buyer got buyers remorse? Give me a break. Not that it has any meaning or significance in the cosmic scope of things but supposedly the owner had difficulty with his financing.

  4. AAIB,
    How about doing one of those architectural makeovers the Times was running for a while? Maybe if all the homeowners within a three block radius kicked in $100 we could help the owner at least fix the exterior.

  5. “How about something more constructive; For all the architects out there, how could you change the facade of this building to make it acceptable? Knock it out and add a glass front?
    How about a rendering or two and a budget?”

    I’ve always thought it would be an interesting design project to take something this awkward and try to make something out of it.

    –an architect in Brooklyn

1 2 3 4