« Booker Again Predicts Nets Won't Make It To Brooklyn Open Studios This Weekend in Fort Greene & Clinton Hill »
May 15, 2009
Horror Show Friday: Mutant Facade Repair
We were biking through Wallabout earlier this week and were struck by the rather odd design choice at 33 Vanderbilt Avenue. For some reason, someone decided to put a layer of screamingly new brick on the lower half of the facade. What possible reason—other than pure bad taste—could account for this decision? Is it cheaper than repairing the existing facade? GMAP
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/9765
Comments
Obviously, this was not done for the aesthetics. It was done to prevent the collapse of the facade or the building, if it was a load bearing wall. The owners probably are not very wealthy and that was all they could afford. I mean seriously, this place is by the freakin' Navy Yard!
Posted by: Polemicist at May 15, 2009 10:06 AM
No, this is being done for purely asthetic reasons.
Looks terrible and reduces the value of the building. . .
Posted by: IronBalls at May 15, 2009 10:15 AM
It looks like they haven't finished. While it is not my taste, this look is favored in many Brooklyn neighborhoods.
Posted by: superstooper at May 15, 2009 10:17 AM
How does this facade prevent a load bearing wall from collapsing? And only 1/2 way up? I don't think so. I'm with ironballs on this one.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 10:18 AM
How does that prevent the collapse of the facade? Maybe you could say that if it went all the way up, but if the facade is damaged on the ground, or parlor floor, more brick halfway up is not a viable answer to the problem, it would crumble with the facade, there's nothing but morter holding it up. Halfway. Are they done?
I do give them points for working with the lintels and window trim. Most people would have just taken them all down.
I don't see what the location has to do with supposed lack of wealth. Doing a decent job of brickwork ain't cheap either. And the Navy Yard vicinity isn't like being on the corner of hell and toxic dump.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at May 15, 2009 10:18 AM
"What possible reason—other than pure bad taste—could account for this decision?"
Peak comp purchase. HELOC's frozen.
Not a load bearing wall. Joists run parallel.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at May 15, 2009 10:19 AM
I find this funny! Brownstoner can take a picture of someone's house, post it on his Blog and make fun of it?????? I'm I missing something??? The sad thing is he gets away with crap and no one calls him out on it!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at May 15, 2009 10:21 AM
i like the effect of the faux crennelations. One's very own castle in Brooklyn.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at May 15, 2009 10:22 AM
Now all it needs is a nice awning....watch the video commercial clip....
http://www.fiberama.com/bay.htm
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 15, 2009 10:25 AM
I'm with the What on this one.
Brownstoner should just start a new daily blog for 'Ugly houses we don't like'. This is what this thread is all about.
Posted by: crimsonson at May 15, 2009 10:28 AM
I think the top half should be that faux fieldstone look in varying shades of pink and beige. Seriously- I hate when people destroy the beauty of a facade with this faux garbage. It's all over Brooklyn- I call it the attack of the Mutant Facade Salesmen but it isn't funny at all.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 10:29 AM
The work appears to be "in progress" .... even the railings on the front stoop are missing, so the stoop must have been rebuilt as well.
I wouldn't call out the facade critics so quickly... I seem to remember another article where some poor soul was lambasted for painting his facade white, or "some such" when in fact that wasn't what was going on at all.
Posted by: bren at May 15, 2009 10:31 AM
Why shouldn't we all care about decisions that make our neighborhoods uglier and destroy the borough's architectural heritage?
Posted by: brownstoner at May 15, 2009 10:31 AM
crimsonson- this is a sad example of how to destroy the beauty and value of your house- not a commentary on taste. I don't know if the job is finished or not (if it's not, where's the scaffolding?) but it can't be a good idea to leave it this way. I'd be wondering about water collecting and sinking in behind the new brick since it doesn't look like there is anything topping off the new brick. That could cause some serious damage over time.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 10:33 AM
The front facade of a townhouse is not a load bearing wall. This is an aesthetic choice I would guess.
It is not merely a question of taste. This indicates a lack of informed judgement. It is possibly a result of bad advise to a homeowner from a contractor or masonry supplier. It is also a poor financial decision in that it will detract rather than enhance the homeowner's investment.
The good news is that it looks like it could be undone in the future and that they stopped (for the time being) half way up.
Posted by: sam at May 15, 2009 10:36 AM
"Why shouldn't we all care about decisions that make our neighborhoods uglier and destroy the borough's architectural heritage?"
Now thats bait! Look stupid when they was building all the "architectural heritage" Condos, you know the one with the Chinese drywall and shoddy construction you said nothing!!
Maybe you will have plenty to write about when these projects go unfinished. Hey Jackass start with Citypoint first!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at May 15, 2009 10:37 AM
Seriously, SERIOUSLY offensive. Granted, taste is a personal matter and all... but this is just nasty. I would bet a new buyer wouldn't do this, so the "peak comp purchase" theory doesn't fly here. Makes you wanna hurt someone and I'm not a big brownstone person (not big enough to live in one anyway).
Posted by: heck_of_a_job_brownie at May 15, 2009 10:39 AM
"Why shouldn't we all care about decisions that make our neighborhoods uglier and destroy the borough's architectural heritage?"
oh, come on. the rest of the block is a random mishmash of styles and chopjobs and chainlink fence, so this isn't destroying any of the area's cultural heritage. it's an ugly facade job. nothing more than that.
Posted by: z at May 15, 2009 10:40 AM
Bxgrl
Understood but you missed my point. It is an subjective thing. I understand the LOCAL concern. But that is a local issue. How many here are actual neighbors of this house?
If not, then it goes back to trashing the owner without knowing anything except the picture taken.
If this was a historic district then that would be legal issue and fair game.
Posted by: crimsonson at May 15, 2009 10:40 AM
"The sad thing is he gets away with crap and no one calls him out on it!"
BRG rewrite:
The sad thing is the owner of this house gets away with this crap but at least Mr. B is calling him out on it.
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 10:40 AM
yeah there is a lot of uppity better than thou comments here.
The facade ain't your taste, don't do it to your building.
Navy yard location diss - nasty guess you live is some better place making you smarter prettier and better educated than those in Wallabout... I have my studio in the Navy Yard and really like parts of the hood.
I personally like it when people upgrade buildings and side step the normal. People like this that post judgments most likely stick to recipes and are spending all their time in others business.
Posted by: BrooklynRooster at May 15, 2009 10:41 AM
"What possible reason—other than pure bad taste—could account for this decision? Is it cheaper than repairing the existing facade?"
Mr. B.;
Allow me to venture a guess on this one. As Sam and others pointed out, this is not a load-bearing wall. However, there may be a non-aesthetic reason for such a wall, and that is waterproofing. The front brick wall may have become excessively porous due to settlement and cracking. The best way to repair such a condition is to remove the old brick facade, apply a vapor-barrier layer to the front of the inner brick wall, and then reconstruct the front facade. However, this is a more expensive job, and my guess is that this fellow was advised to just apply a new facade over the existing one.
Posted by: benson at May 15, 2009 10:42 AM
Yeah, that's a real aesthetically pleasing and historically important block there.
Next non-issue, please.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at May 15, 2009 10:43 AM
I'm riding the What-mobile on this one. Ugly? In your opinion, apparently not in the eyes of the homeowner. Bad financial decision? Why do you care? Do you pay their bills? Are you getting a piece of the action if and when they sell their home? Destroying the architectural heritage of the hood? Then lobby for a landmarking of such homes so they can't do that.
Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at May 15, 2009 10:44 AM
I can't believe I'm going to say this but here goes: I agree with the what.
We have no idea what this guy/gal can afford to do with his house. Maybe he has a sick kid whose medical bills are more important to him than what his house looks like. Granted some people who have money do horrible things to their homes but don't judge until you know the whole story.
This feature just screams ellitism and its a real turn off when you log onto this site.
Posted by: italiana71 at May 15, 2009 10:51 AM
crimsonson- Many, if not most of us love brownstoner because we love old homes and architecture. and resepct it. So even though I'm not a neighbor, it's fair game for a comment. What I wouldn't do is trash the owner's taste. But I am curious about why he chose to go this route, rather than restore the facade or do something in keeping with the original design. That said, I give him credit for saving the window and door detail.
And I agree with BrooklynRooster re the Navy Yard and Poley's idiot comment.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 10:52 AM
"I'm with the What on this one.
Brownstoner should just start a new daily blog for 'Ugly houses we don't like'. This is what this thread is all about."
Um, if you read the comments on just about every house/coop/condo/development posting on this site, you'll realize this is what this entire SITE is about.
Posted by: new2hood at May 15, 2009 10:56 AM
Since all of ya optically challenged mothers seem to be ok with with the freedom this owner enjoys to fuglify his property then you should be just fine with Mr. B's freedom to write about such things, right? It is Mr. B's blog after all, you bunch of contrarian wannabes you.
Posted by: heck_of_a_job_brownie at May 15, 2009 10:57 AM
Doesn't really bother me, maybe it looks terrible in person. Maybe they chose to live in an un-landmark block so they could do as the please and not worry about the brownstone heretics.
Posted by: DeLepp at May 15, 2009 10:59 AM
All of you too scared to have opinions about esthetics...
BOO
italiana - you're confusing judging whats been done with judging the person
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 11:05 AM
DeLepp - isn't this person the heretic - don't you mean the Brownstone Inquisitors?
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 11:08 AM
So if hypothetically my townhouse is messed up and I can't afford to properly restore the facade, I assume Mr. B will cut me a check?
Posted by: dirty_hipster at May 15, 2009 11:14 AM
Excuse me, dittoburg. I prefer to think of myself as an architectural fascist :-)
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 11:14 AM
Nope, this isn't a landmarc block so they can choose to do as they please. In my time I've seen much worse done to a facade. Where that is vanderbilt between park and myrtle there are some real horror shows where they put up the villified fedder buildings or just let the facade decay. I would rather have above instead of decay.
Posted by: DeLepp at May 15, 2009 11:16 AM
Bxgrl - I'm sure this guy will be paving over the front lawn next. If he had one.
DH, if you live in 11211 its guaranteed that your townhouse facade is messed up.
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 11:18 AM
Maybe they aren't done. Maybe they will take the new brick all the way up. Not as nice as red brick, but better than this halfway, two-tone job. Benson may have the right reason for why the owner went this route. Perhaps the original brick was compromised due to it being painted over and not allowed to breathe. I've never understood why so many brick homes in Brooklyn were painted brick red.
Posted by: slopefarm at May 15, 2009 11:20 AM
Delepp- agree with that - when I walk around my neighborhood where there has been a lot of bad facade work done, work like this seems to add to the damage, not fix it. And frankly, some of the facade work is horrific and I can't imagine anyone in their right mind thinking it added anything to the look of the building. And those I see for sale are either sitting forever because who wants to lay out the kind of money it would take to restore the facade, or if not for sale, have been left to fall apart. They're eyesores and they bring down the neighborhood.
That said, while I don't like what was done to this building, and I'm sure the owner has his reasons, the place looks cared for and that's all important. It just looks charmless.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 11:25 AM
not to be too contrarian ;) but, I disagree with benson. You are describibng a way more radical path to leak repair than is normal my friend. Usually leaks are handled by merely re-pointing the brick and perhaps replacing the individual brick units that are damaged or cracked. The concept of taking down the entire facade in order to put in a vapor barrier and then rebuilding a replica facade is not good preservation practice and it is overkill for all but a very few cases where the whole facade may be leaning or bowed.
Putting up a brick veneer like this will, if anything, trap more water behind the veneer. It is a disaster not only aesthetically but also from a construction viewpoint. It is just a bad choice no matter what.
Posted by: sam at May 15, 2009 11:34 AM
At first glance it seems they're doing a bad imitation of the new brownstones on State Street in Boreum hill. They too have non-conforming brownstone brick choices. At least it still contextual, unlike last weeks "twins" in south slope.
Posted by: DeLepp at May 15, 2009 11:35 AM
DeLepp - are you referring to Rosie Perez?
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 11:48 AM
I'm w/ Sam. It would've been cheaper & more effective to have the original masonry redone.
Posted by: Arkady at May 15, 2009 11:49 AM
Glad someone more knowledgeable stepped in to put all those "not rich enough" excuses to rest.
Posted by: heck_of_a_job_brownie at May 15, 2009 11:51 AM
"this is a sad example of how to destroy the beauty and value of your house- not a commentary on taste."
"What possible reason—other than pure bad taste—could account for this decision?"
"Why shouldn't we all care about decisions that make our neighborhoods uglier"
It's very much about taste. As the What said, Mr. Brownstoner has taken a picture of someone's house, posted it on his site, and singled it out as in "bad taste" and "ugly" (paraphrasing here). Whatever his rationalization, he's behaving like a jerk.
Posted by: East New York at May 15, 2009 11:52 AM
ditto, hilarious! She's got some real barkers and I think those are very contextual and make brooklyn what it is.
Posted by: DeLepp at May 15, 2009 11:53 AM
Yes, What. It's called free speech on the Internet. Perhaps you've heard of it.
Posted by: mopar at May 15, 2009 11:58 AM
Sam;
I don't disagree with what you are saying. However, you are making one big assumption in your statement: that an owner will always get good advice from a contractor. It's like the old saying that if your tool is a hammer, then the job will always be to drive in the nail. What I'm saying is that one possible scenario here is that the fellow had a leaky wall, went to a masonry contractor whose schtick is to build new facades, and - don't you know - he recommended a new facade!
Posted by: benson at May 15, 2009 12:00 PM
They certainly don't look out of place. They should be landmarked before someone ruins them.
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 12:00 PM
Yes benson...a re-pointing would look better and be less costly!!!!
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 15, 2009 12:04 PM
Here is what the contractor probably told the homeowner:
" well, first we would have to strip off the paint and then repoint every brick by hand. it would take a lot of time and be expensive and when we're finished you will still have hundred year old brick on your house and it will look like everybody else's house. Instead, for the same money, maybe only a little more, we could give you a brand-new facade, with NEW brick that will stand out and look like you have spent a lot more than actually have."
Stories like that are repeated a hundred times a week all over Brooklyn by second-rate contractors looking to take advantage of less-educated owners.
Posted by: sam at May 15, 2009 12:06 PM
Yes, What. It's called free speech on the Internet. Perhaps you've heard of it.
Posted by: mopar at May 15, 2009 11:58 AM
Do I have the right to yell "fire" in a crowed theater?
Answer this question!!!! What if the owner was trying to sell this building??? Maybe someone was thinking on buying it and now they read this Clap-Trap on Brownstoner????
This has hurt the "Value" of this property and could make Jon liable for damages! The owner of this house did not do any thing to Jon but is now compromised by this post on the internet!!! What if somebody did this to you, would you say the same things???? I hope not!
East New York now you understand where I'm coming from, the retards take insanity to new heights!!!!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at May 15, 2009 12:09 PM
Maybe there's a lot of architectural detail inside.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at May 15, 2009 12:12 PM
Folks;
I just realized that my statements above may come off as contradictory, so let me further elaborate:
-yes, we all can agree that for normal walls repointing is the way to go;
-as Sam acknowledged above, however, in the case of bowing or leaning facades, pointing will not do the trick. In this case, the front wall should be rebuilt, and this IS an expensive job.
So what I'm saying is that the guy may have had the second case (bad front wall), and went with a new facade as a cheaper fix. While I agree with Sam that just applying a new facade over it is not a great solution,it may have been what he did as a cheaper alternative that his contractor suggested. Believe it or not, some folks do opt for a cheap way out!
Posted by: benson at May 15, 2009 12:12 PM
What - you're one of those idiots who think you can sue for anything.
As an attorney, I'll take your case. Send me a $2,000 retainer.
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 12:12 PM
Everyone is entitled to their opinion wrt the way something looks, etc. I'll be the first to agree with that. But, riddle me this: Was it really necessary to put up the exact address? That's just mean.
Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at May 15, 2009 12:17 PM
"What if somebody did this to you, would you say the same things???? I hope not!
"
Didn't we all diss Mr.B's kitchen renovation? That was way back when Brownstoner had just been born.
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 12:19 PM
Put all the pieces together folks;
-Mr. B.points out the exact address;
-The What is on a tear, threatening to sue;
Yes, that's right, this is The What's house!!!!! He's putting up this facade just to aggravate Mr. B and his loyal followers!!!!
Posted by: benson at May 15, 2009 12:21 PM
So, ENY- you think the facade is a good thing? You did take my comment out of context. I don't know why the homeowner did it although sam may have that down pat (thanks, sam). And I am not making a judgement call on the owner's taste but I am saying it is out of context and doesn't work for the house. And that's based on the architecture of the house itself, not whether or not the owner paints his walls bordello red and garnishes the windows with 5 miles of polyester swaths. The facade has impact on how the house ages, its value and property values around it.
Mr. B is guilty of hyperbole- after all he needs to generate hits. And maybe the facade isn't even finished but we did have a discussion about the technical aspects of facade repair and the impact on property values too.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 12:23 PM
benson, my first post stated that this awful remuddle was proabbly the result of BAD advise from a contractor. Why did you interpret it to mean that contractors always give good advise?
Posted by: sam at May 15, 2009 12:24 PM
"So, ENY- you think the facade is a good thing?"
Nope, I don't think it's "good." It looks unfinished at best, and less than contextual at worst. But I didn't take a picture of it and post it on a site and tell everyone how badly I think it sucks, Mr. Brownstoner did. It's his absolute right to do that, just as it's my right to share my opinion that he's a jerk for doing so.
"Mr. B is guilty of hyperbole- after all he needs to generate hits."
Cool! Then he should certainly be a big enough man to withstand any criticism that may come as a result of his actions.
Posted by: East New York at May 15, 2009 12:27 PM
I always thought the What lived with Oscar the grouch (In the extreme bottom right corner of the photo perhaps).
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 12:28 PM
What - you're one of those idiots who think you can sue for anything.
As an attorney, I'll take your case. Send me a $2,000 retainer.
So you think this does not hurt the value of the property! You know that in a court of law the plaintiff wants to punish the defendant financially and does not care about the outcome. Here is a example I dug up! There are tons of Blogger Lawsuits going on!!!
Libel lawsuit filed against Cape blogger
A Cape Cod Today blogger last spring accused the people opposed to dredging Barnstable Harbor of not-in-my-backyard politicking. Naming their names - and using one off-color description - blogger Peter Robbins told his readers exactly whom to blame if their boats ran aground this summer.
Now the leading opponent is suing Robbins for libel, an increasingly common charge against bloggers. Robbins's lawyer counters that his free speech is at stake.
Now if this owner had a "itch to scratch" he could hit him with a Lawsuit Dumbass!
The lawsuit is the latest challenge to the freedom of bloggers, who are subject to the same libel laws - though not the same editorial standards - as the mainstream media. While the First Amendment protects the right to state opinions, bloggers can get into trouble when they include factual statements in their postings, according to David Ardia, director of the Citizen Media Law Project at Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet & Society.
Well lookie here Jackass and I don't have NEXUS! There is plenty of meat on that bone!!!
More than 500 blogger lawsuits have arisen in US courts - often generating more publicity than the posts that spawned them, Ardia said.
Read the rest of the article, it just get better!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at May 15, 2009 12:28 PM
I do agree Mr. B should not have posted the address - that was completely unnecessary.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 12:28 PM
"Yes, that's right, this is The What's house!!!!! He's putting up this facade just to aggravate Mr. B and his loyal followers!!!!"
No it's not my house because I would call my Lawyer ASAP and Jon would get a "Telephone Book" smacked into his chest!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at May 15, 2009 12:30 PM
Sam;
My mistake! I forgot that you had said this at the beginning. When I said that you are assuming that he will receive good advice,I was reacting to your correct techncial analysis.
Have a good weekend all!
Posted by: benson at May 15, 2009 12:32 PM
"I do agree Mr. B should not have posted the address - that was completely unnecessary."
Oh now you are waking up huh????? Oh maybe it was not a great idea????
I cannot understand why you let Brownstoner get away with this shit!!!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at May 15, 2009 12:33 PM
ENY- he seems to be. He's been hit with enough insults and brickbats, warranted or not. I'm not arguing your right to say it sucks- I agree it isn't his shining moment. I just didn't want my comments taken out of context- I don't feel I'm any arbiter of taste - I'm interested in the practical aspects of why the facade was done this way because from an architectural and visual standpoint, its problematic. To me at least.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 12:33 PM
Yea What, you're an internet attorney, great citation of precedent. Like I say, send me the cash, we'll sue em for libelling the house.
On the other hand I'd like to apologize for attorneys who take people's cash knowing full well there's no actual case.
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 12:34 PM
what- to tell you the truth I didn't notice he posted the address until it was mentioned. I tend to glance at the initial post, not necessarily peruse it.
And I have NEVER been in favor of posting home addresses. We would have had the same discussion without knowing exactly where the house is.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 12:38 PM
bxgrl, I singled out your comment because you plainly stated that Mr. Brownstoner's objection "was not about taste" and it just so happens that I completely disagree. That's all. In that respect I did not take your comment "out of context."
"East New York now you understand where I'm coming from, the retards take insanity to new heights!!!!"
I understood previously, man, I just wasn't as worked up about it as you are. But some things really piss me off, and I don't mind saying so.
Posted by: East New York at May 15, 2009 12:42 PM
"what- to tell you the truth I didn't notice he posted the address until it was mentioned. I tend to glance at the initial post, not necessarily peruse it.
And I have NEVER been in favor of posting home addresses. We would have had the same discussion without knowing exactly where the house is."
Here is the Wake the F**** up award! Now do you understand now????!!!!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at May 15, 2009 12:52 PM
There are rows and rows of houses that have had this light brick facade treatment, granite sills, granite stairs and yard, the wooden door with the oval stained glass-ish window and the chucky sandy balustrade, etc.
I think there must be as many of these in Brooklyn as there are "proper" brownstones. I'm surprised that they didn't strip the other details off.
This must be in a location that has been claimed by the historical brownstone police. I understand the value of preservation, but not every house needs or deserves it. At the turn of the century people made changes to the brownstones to suit the style of the day. I think most people just don't recognize them and only see the houses as old. It's a tough topic. You can go too far with this stuff and end up with something that looks really sanitized.
I see both sides. I can agree however that it is rude and inappropriate to just plunk a house up on the blog for the sake of ridicule. It was clear from the get-go that this was not going to be an intelligent conversation.
Must we beat this horse again?
Posted by: superstooper at May 15, 2009 12:59 PM
ENY...um.... actually I never stated that. I was stating my point of view as to why I was commenting, not in support of Mr. B trashing taste. Maybe I could have been clearer but If I thought it was ok for him to do that, I would have said so plainly and in no uncertain terms - as you well know :-)
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 12:59 PM
So you're calling me a retard eh? That's libel which you purposely put into the public forum. I can have a mental health professional testify that I'm clinically not a retard on account of my IQ being above 70, so I'm afraid you won't be able to use truth as a defense.
So Mr. What, do you accept service of summons by e-mail? Or should I send my people to Lodi?
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 1:01 PM
"Must we beat this horse again?"
Actually, yes. We want to beat this dead horse over and over again. We are Brownstoner posters!
Posted by: benson at May 15, 2009 1:04 PM
what- and what makes you think I haven't been awake? (uh-oh. Incoming!!) Maybe its you who hasn't been reading what I've been posting these last few years?
I'll tell you something else- I don't condemn people out of hand. And i don't automatically assume the worst of everyone. I try to be fair- when Jon acts like an ass, I've said so. And not always in public. But he gets knocked around unfairly too. It's happened to you too. I will never bash you when you're right. And you are right lots of times. But when you act like a jerk, I'll speak my mind on that too. And of course, you've done the same with me.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 1:06 PM
Right, why is that?
Posted by: superstooper at May 15, 2009 1:07 PM
"ENY...um.... actually I never stated that."
Your post (please note the first sentence): crimsonson- this is a sad example of how to destroy the beauty and value of your house- not a commentary on taste. I don't know if the job is finished or not (if it's not, where's the scaffolding?) but it can't be a good idea to leave it this way. I'd be wondering about water collecting and sinking in behind the new brick since it doesn't look like there is anything topping off the new brick. That could cause some serious damage over time.
Posted by: East New York at May 15, 2009 1:08 PM
benson- and damn proud if it! (er, I think.) :-)
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 1:08 PM
"Maybe I could have been clearer but If I thought it was ok for him to do that, I would have said so plainly and in no uncertain terms - as you well know :-)"
How would I know that? Look, I'm not trying to start a fight - I respect you and think you are a respectful person as well. I just think we disagree on this matter. Not a big deal in the overall scheme of things! You're OK in my book.
Posted by: East New York at May 15, 2009 1:11 PM
Come on Mr. B., we need a posh person's house interior to trash next. Just so we can put rest to the knee-jerk "elitism" charges.
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 1:11 PM
Dewy eyed flowers of the upper middle class, they want to rebel against their "brash bourgeois" upbringings intellectually, but without sacrificing material comforts.
Posted by: superstooper at May 15, 2009 1:16 PM
ENY- again- i was speaking for myself, from my point of view, about how and why I would answer. No where do I say anything about brownstoner's reason. Since I can't do the Vulcan mind meld it would be presumptuous of me to speak for him. And so I didn't.
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 1:18 PM
ENY- aww shucks. I like you too, and I'm actually agreeing with you. While I don't like the idea of taste trashing, I really did want to respond to why the facade was done this way. Having rube goldberged many an item, I can totally understand why the homeowner would do the faced as he did. And I don't like the spin Jon put on it at all. Especially since, if we're talking taste, I live in a glass house myself :-)
Posted by: bxgrl at May 15, 2009 1:23 PM
Maybe I'm opptimistic but I think it is a work in progress - and I agree it is probably a "new facade" which is cheaper than replacing the old one.
Which leads me to the question how is putting a brick facade on a brick facaded building - destroying architechtural history????? Yeah maybe if it only goes 1/2 way it is ugly but it far from a destruction in any event. I also agree with WHAT on this - how about calling the home owner and finding out what the deal is before trashing someones home on your website - just b/c this is a "blog" doesnt mean you cant do even a little bit of reporting before you attack someone....
Posted by: fsrg at May 15, 2009 2:04 PM
Aw shit! Now I'm bummed out!
Wayman Tisdale, a three-time All-American at Oklahoma, who played 12 seasons in the NBA, died after a two-year battle with cancer. He was 44.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=4168852
Also he was Pianist and a great musician.
http://www.amazon.com/Wayman-Tisdale/e/B000AQ2IGI
Most athletes who moved into the recording business during the '90s found rap to be their forté, but Wayman Tisdale shifted the field to contemporary jazz with his 1995 debut album Power Forward, recorded for the Motown subsidiary MoJazz. A 1984 Olympic Gold medalist in basketball, All-American at the University of Oklahoma, and member of the Phoenix Suns, Tisdale plays bass in his Fifth Quarter Band. He signed with MoJazz in 1995, releasing Power Forward later that year. By 1996, his second album In the Zone had appeared; Decisions followed two years later; Face to Face was issued.
RIP Wayman..
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at May 15, 2009 2:19 PM
I haven't seen this in person, but just had a theory I thought I'd share --
I was in a brick store a while ago, and saw a display for a stucco system that required the stucco to be applied to a proprietary brick. The idea is that the facade looks like stone, but the system supposedly had some advantages over applying stucco over ordinary brick (I don't remember the details).
The proprietary under-bricks were seriously fugly.
So maybe, if they're still working on this place, they're looking to create the look of a limestone facade on their brick house? Maybe their contractor doesn't know how to do real stucco work.
Like I said, I don't actually know what these people are doing. Just a thought.
Posted by: vanyali at May 15, 2009 2:59 PM
"how about calling the home owner and finding out what the deal is before trashing someones home on your website - just b/c this is a "blog" doesnt mean you cant do even a little bit of reporting before you attack someone...."
The person isn't the house, despite what some people on this blog apparently think.
Try this: "Bob - That hat you are wearing is ugly".
Now are we calling Bob ugly or the hat?
Posted by: dittoburg at May 15, 2009 3:16 PM
What, it's not libel to say something is ugly. That is a matter of opinion.
Posted by: mopar at May 15, 2009 3:47 PM
dittoburg,
This Brownstoner feature is simply tacky. You can slice it and dice it and spin it any way you want. Would you want someone posting a pictue of your house and poking fun at it? Questioning your taste? Maybe the owner likes the look. Who knows? Quite frankly I like every other aspect of this site and I think brownstoner does a lot for Brooklyn.
However, this is catty.
And this house not even being in a historic district makes it even worse.
Brownstoner has the right to say and do anything it wants but just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Posted by: italiana71 at May 15, 2009 3:51 PM
A blog, catty? What is the world coming to?
Posted by: mopar at May 15, 2009 4:39 PM
Ummm.....we do realize that the owner isn't done right? hard to tell if i like the brick or not....
What I DON'T like about it is that the new brick projects 4" from the streetline: which is a very odd amount to project...
One thing I agree with the above posters about: doesn't F%^%ing matter what I think.
Posted by: young archi at May 15, 2009 5:35 PM
Hey all,
I've been enjoying this pissfest. I especially like the fact that some day "this war is gonna end." The war in the comments section has raged for far too long! Give peace a chance.
Anyway, I live a block away from this house (and have for about a decade) and it has been in this half-covered state for about two years now. The word on the street was that the owner was trying to pretty the place up to sell it, but ran out of money during the renovation. And so the contractors left the job half-finished. And for those who were interested, to my (untrained) eye, the facade looked perfectly undamaged before the brickface was installed.
Resume your arguing!
Posted by: Norton_Butler at May 15, 2009 9:54 PM
Juicy!
Posted by: mopar at May 15, 2009 11:54 PM
Latest Restaurant Additions
-
Chickadee Chick
added November 6, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Vutera
added November 5, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Park Cafe
added November 4, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Bahia
added November 3, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Aqualis Grill
added November 2, 2009 12:00 PM in Fort Greene -
Wombat
added October 30, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Organic Heights
added October 29, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Giardini Pizza
added October 28, 2009 12:00 PM in Carroll Gardens -
Rye
added October 27, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Bati
added October 26, 2009 12:00 PM in Fort Greene
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.