214-carlton-avenue-0809.jpg
We’re liking the location (just a block from Fort Greene Park) and basic Brownstone-y vibe of this co-op at 214 Carlton Avenue. The 1,100-square-foot floor-through apartment’s gonna need some work though and we’re not so sure that the fact that the co-op board is “informal” is a good thing: Might make it easier to get in but it’s not necessarily a recipe for a well-run or financially stable. The listing, which mentions a second studio apartment, is also confusing—it’s not clear if the $509,000 asking price is for both apartments combined or just the floor-through. Sometimes these random situations are good opportunities; other times they are trouble.
214 Carlton Avenue, #5 [Mims/StreetEasy] GMAP P*Shark



What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. I was supposed to go see this place back when it was listed for $475k but the agent stood me up. Really unprofessional even just in trying to set up an appointment with the guy. When I was standing outside waiting for him at the time he proposed, I saw that the exterior is pretty beat up, and the building isn’t kept all that well. Not falling down, but definitely not looked after by an active, engaged co-op board. I also spoke to a tennant who laughed at me when I mentioned that I was there to see about buying the unit. There’s probably a lot more to the story, but my experience was enough to tell me that I didn’t want to bank my savings there.

  2. I was just gonna say the term “informal” coop board in the listing means the common stairway floors desperately need refinishing….but y’all got a much better story. What a coincidence.

  3. And if you search ACRIS for that corporate name you can see the transfer of the property from the couple to the coop. (I won’t provide a link out of some sense of respect for their privacy but if you are handy with ACRIS it should be easy).

  4. It’s definitely a coop, at least all evidence I saw as a resident points in that direction (mail would be delivered in the name of 212-214 Dekalb Corporation or something like that, and the common electric bill (the one that sometimes didn’t get paid) was in that name. Also, the owner of my unit told me it’s a coop, and I have no reason to think the owner would lie about something like that, or anything for that matter. But’s of course none of that is to say that the conversion was done properly, or any of the relevant filings have been made or formalities have been followed, etc. — which gets back to my original point that buyers should be very wary of this coop.

  5. and senor brownstoner, you know i love you, but i blog and take the one second to check my links on every post… you seem to have broken links once or twice a week… [though maybe it’s your side-kicks fault]

    check b4 you post!

  6. I saw these units several weeks ago. It looks like it switched brokers recently and was re-listed. At a HIGHER price than when I saw it. This place was a big old mess from top to bottom. The buidling is literally falling apart, with the central staircase crumbling underfoot and pulling away from the wall. The broker at the time said that the studio and the floor-thru could not be combined. Both units are in need of massive work, and the top floor floor-thru needs to be gutted completely. It is un-liveable as it is. The broker described it as a laid-back coop, with each original owner holding a floor thru and a stuio each. This brownstone has an addition on the side that makes for 8 units total. I think most are rentals. Everything about this listing and the showing just screamed “shady!!”.

1 2