202-Clermont-Avenue-0709.jpg
While this four-story brick townhouse at 202 Clermont Avenue still has many of its original details, they are overwhelmed, in our opinion, by the charmless, albeit thorough, renovation that was performed back in 2005. If there was any doubt that the person doing the renovation did not understand the aesthetics of most potential buyers, just check out that garden or the bathrooms. It’s too bad because the raw materials were there. It looks like the current owner paid $1,625,000 for the house in 2006, probably just as the previous owner was completing the renovation. It went on the market in March asking $1,725,000 and was cut to $1,675,000 in May, where it remains today.
202 Clermont Avenue [Brooklyn Properties] GMAP P*Shark



What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. As others have said, definitely not the worst house ever seen here. But if I were in the market – too “done” for me. I wish they could have kept some original flooring, especially on the parlor floor. Most of the house is ok, but nothing excites me. For that amount of money, I need to be excited. The garden could easily be reworked, but the hard work is done, so that’s good. I hate the bathrooms, but one could certainly stand to use them until they were redone. The best part of the house for me, is the nice French door out to the deck/stairway.

  2. I don’t understand all the doom and gloom with this reno. The bathrooms are nice in my opinion. I have certainly seen far worse asking for a lot more money.

    I am with Antidope. Only I think MM will never be as lucky as she is delusional. I firmly believe that with such a house you come up with other options before you give it away to the likes of MM. I don’t know the area. I am assuming there isn’t a “pj” near by or you all would be screaming that the owners needs to give it away for free. I think it is priced to sell.

  3. lots of super tacky elements, but garden is a non issue – what makes it gross are the skimpy plantings and the hideous red mulch which is always a disaster- just needs a couple thou of new plants and overflowing containers. On the other hand, the stairs coming down from deck are awful

  4. no. but where is the market for that house today? truth is no one knows. so maybe price is still in 2006. personally my guess is it’s 15% off. Call it $1.4. Real money lost.

    also pls note, unlike all the other firm prognosticators around here, i’m perfectly willing to say i’ve been mostly wrong about the market (stocks, i rates, real estate) for 10 years. In some cases, I even held firm convictions. And every one of my firm convictions was wrong.

    So…today I firmly believe prices are going in the toilet.

  5. > Stupid squares on the wall. Why?!

    I’ll confess to having always hated those. Then again, my tastes tend towards Mid-century Modern rather than Victorian.

    That gilded mirror over the fireplace would be the first thing to go.

    No wait, the second.

    The first thing would be that fugly bathroom sink with the wrought iron stand.

  6. MM: nice word choice “If they’re lucky, 2005.” I think you goofed and meant, “If I’m lucky, 2005.” Markets can go either way, last I checked.

    We’ll see, but in the meantime see petebklyn, er, show me the beef.

    Don’t love the reno myself but it’s far from tragic.

    That backyard is prob for a reason. Big building next door = full shade = hard to grow anything interesting?

  7. The floors are very unfortunate. The bathrooms are heinous, the combination of the larger tile with the mosaic does not work here….and those sinks? Kitchen is out of context. It’s a shame that someone will have to tear out all of these new renovations and that money was wasted like this. Could be gorgeous.

  8. I don’t get Mr.B’s hating on this one. Sure the sinks could be improved but don’t underestimate the appeal of ‘move right in’. Anyway he’ll get his comeuppance when you see this on the ‘closed sales’ post sooner rather than later 🙂

1 4 5 6 7 8