House of the Day: 202 Clermont Avenue
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…
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
I know you guys love yer “original details” and all that. But I seriously hate those “wall frame” things… uggh. Baseboard, yes. Fancy mouldings and ceiling detail, absolutely great. Stupid squares on the wall. Why?!
Oh, and that garden is horrible. Why would you want to look at that?
have seen worse asking for more. garden and easy DIY fix.
Well, if we’re at 2006 prices now, I don’t think we’re too much farther away from 2004 prices – question is where this will land. If they’re lucky, 2005.
The important parts are all still there.
The choices yeah, not so much my taste BUT, they are all clean, and perfectly fine until you decide when and how and if you want to change anything. Once you put your things in the house you won’t hate the kitchens and baths nearly so much.
The amoeba backyard is just weird.
Nothing shown here is a deal breaker so far as I’m concerned.
Wow, garish. Looks like Dina Whatserface from the Real Housewives of NJ redid it. I’d rip out the garden, pronto, and see if I could somehow work with the bathrooms, though they’d need a rethink.
The good bones are still there, the curve-headed double doors -love those- the mantles the woodwork around the windows, the beautiful stairs. Sometimes the parlors in these houses look very narrow without furniture. And there is no reason to pick out the little wall moldings in a contrasting color, which makes the room look even narrower. All in all, a new paint job, new light fixtures, good furnitute arrangement and this house would look terrific. I would keep the gilded pier mirror but I know others think such things are “revolting”.
The house is a beaut and although the neighborhood is not my favorite, I know a lot of people love that area and would consider this a good location.
1.6 or so may move it. The owners have to expect to lose money, they bought it at the height of the market a couple of years ago.
Beautiful house- I could live there (if I married a millionaire who didn’t invest with Madoff.)
Pretty nice house actually. Can see what you mean about some of the choices but much of it is pretty solid. Garden is hideous but could be ripped up and done again if one so desired. Price is definitely of the 2007 variety. Needs to come back to earth a bit. 1.3 or so should do the trick.
1st time posting – those bathrooms seem nice. Subway tile and the B&W floors in one, and the others seemed ok. The garden isn’t my cup of tea, but again, it looks like it wasn’t done on the cheap.
That said nearly 1.7M for betw. Willoughby and Myrtle seems damn high.