The Saddest House In New York City

276 Comments

1. Words don’t fail me. Unfortunately, they’re all four letter words.

   Those people don’t deserve to own that house and the Landmarks PRESERVATION Commission should be thoroughly and unabashedly ashamed of itself.

   I hope Nancy haunts them and makes all their lives *miserable*.

   Heartbreaking.

   1. LIKE!!!!

2. Surely those carpenter ants were the reason they put up an ugly fence next to the ancient, pre-existing (I presume the neighbor’s) fence.

   I can only imagine how they ravaged the presumably beautiful interior woodwork.

3. Such a sad story…I live in Kew Gardens next to Richmond Hill and often pass through the neighborhood. Some beautiful homes remain but many are in poor condition and at risk. Sigh.

4. My jaw dropped, and I am horrified.

   If owners are willing to desecrate the exterior in that fashion, the interior renovations must be worthy of nightmares.

5. I’m calling bullshit on the carpenter ants.

   1. Well, those ants can be pretty nasty. . . despite the thousands of dollars they insisted be spent on destroying that home, they apparently they also insisted on a basketball hoop.

6. As a lifelong Queens resident, I’m saddened but not disappointed. Heck, it’s pretty remarkable that they didn’t just start from scratch. This example does point to a problem unique to Queens- how to maintain or restore the beautiful and historic homes in lower-income areas while giving people there fair opportunities for the housing they need.

7. Renovated? That’s an abomination! And I’ll bet that the new homeowners think they’ve got great taste! Those eagle statues add a real VEGAS-Y kinda kitchy touch though. LOL.

8. I have tears in my eyes. I always wonder if the people who do that to homes are then happy living in it, or if they feel cursed and never settled – that’s what I hope for them. It happened to my childhood home – and know my father regrets ever selling it to the poeple who did that.

9. omg, what a horror show! Cue the “Psycho” music!

   This is really heartbreaking. I wonder why Ms. Cataldi’s proposal was rejected??

10. Oh…this made me sick to my stomach. Horrible.

    1. That was my response as well. I literally got pains in my stomach. I feel so sick.

       To paraphrase H.L. Mencken: No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the average homeowner.

11. My god what on earth would possess you to take such a beautiful house and turn it into a disgusting monstrosity. SHAME on those current owners. That is not progress that is very much the opposite of it.

12. This post made my heart ache. 🙁

13. that is indeed a sad sad story!

14. Apparently, in 2010, it was big news in the neighborhood about the house changing… so sickening! http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-05-26/local/27065350_1_historic-district-landmarks-preservation-commission-city-landmark

15. They took a beautiful house with charm and “soul”, and turned it into an ugly nightmare. Their children will grow up with “ugly” as a defining part of childhood. Awful.

16. Ugh, how incredibly heartbreaking.

17. This breaks my heart. I just can’t even … oh how awful. The original is like my dream house … the renovation looks like a new-age, no-taste nightmare.

18. This made me tear up.

19. You should mail the comments of disgust to the new owners. That was just HORRIBLE!!!!

20. Ugh. It’s awful. What a tragedy. Why don’t those of us who’d treat these houses right have all the money? I live in Williamsburg Brooklyn, near Olive Street and the house that was filmed for “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind,” which was torn down a year or three ago. Broke my heart. If only I were wealthy, I’d have bought it, restored it, lived in it, and guarded it with my life. p.s. Did carpenter ants also kill all the trees here?

21. Oh my god WHY!?!?!?!?

22. I’ve lived in Richmond Hill for the last two years and am constantly amazed on how gorgeous this neighborhood is and how most (but not all) homeowners are keeping up their homes. This may not be the best example (far from it) but at least they didn’t raze it and build some anonymous-looking gulag that have infested my old Greenpoint neighborhood, where I lived for 35 years. Sometimes I wonder if the architects designing some of the new developments in Williamsburg/Greenpoint/Long Island City think that junior high schools are the zenith of architectural inspiration.

    And about the new owners: do any of us know how it would’ve cost to fully restore the house to its former glory after the carpenter ant infestation? Or the cost of building from scratch? This restoration may have been the most cost-efficient solution that was available.

    1. I don’t know, when I got rid of carpenter ants in my ca 1850 home in a different part of NY, it cost a couple of hundred dollars. . . and then may be couple thousand in fixing a leaky roof, repairing ancient wiring, and the usual stripping away all the former “improvements” before properly repairing and painting. Looks like they spent way more than that on what they destroyed, which, BTW, I do not find “aesthetically pleasing” at all, especially when, if they owners wanted a “new” house, they could have easily bought one. And only time will tell, now that they have wrapped the lower story in a brick facade, whether it was “done well”. . . usually those false wrappings become a moisture trap, which can cause all kinds of problems. . .

23. It’s not to my liking either, but does it count for something that it’s done very nicely according to a different aesthetic? A lot of that neighborhood is South Asian now, and it’s consistent with their aesthetic and seemingly done well. I guess I wish it had been a different house, since there are many in Richmond Hill that aren’t so beautiful to start with, but there’s still something to be said for allowing homeowners to renovate according to taste rather than the dictates of historical accuracy and taste.

24. When they eventually go to sell the house, I hope they take a bath; that their house is severely downmarket compared with all its beautifully preserved neighbors.

    Object lesson: in Harlem, the more original details that a house has, the more it will sell for. The more the original details have been ripped out the lower the house will sell for.

25. The words tacky, tasteless, desecration, and OH GOD, WHY?!?!?! haven’t failed me. I mean, my god — they took a beautiful historic home and turned it into a 1990s-style ticky tacky McMansion. Aren’t there plenty of those on Long Island? I’m sure that for the price of these “renovations” they could have bought a horrid modern @$$box somewhere else.

    If you don’t want a historic house, don’t buy one. It’s that simple, people.

26. I grew up in Queens, then left and moved upstate, and am working in a “heritage” field (cultural resource management). When I would visit my dad, I noticed this style of house renovation all the time, in the Jamaica area.

    I started to wonder about this, since I was saddened by the changes in historic character that these renovations (and new construction) meant for the old neighborhood. So I am sad to see what happened here, as I am saddened to see this happening to countless other properties in my old neighborhood.

    Still, I wonder if there are many factors going on other than just “people who don’t care about history.”

    I noticed that these houses remind me very much of new construction that I have seen in other parts of the world, especially areas that have the same ethnic makeup of many people who now live in Queens. If the aesthetic of their former homes and neighborhood plays a factor in their choices, this may be a factor. (Not an excuse, but a factor.) Are we expecting people to preserve “heritage” of old Queens, at the expense of their own heritage – or feelings of community?

    Whenever we say we are losing “our heritage, our identity, or our history,” just whose heritage, identity or history are we talking about? It’s more complex in major urban areas.

    I have had similar discussions colleagues about old Italian neighborhoods in the place I now live. They never understood why the Italian immigrants of 100-50 years ago would chop down all the trees, and put one or two grapevines. Well, there are reasons that had meaning for them. (Grapes are important, less trees means more sun for growing vegetables, and it felt more like southern Italy this way.) Are we seeing something similar in NYC, as different communities come in and change the character of neighborhoods?

    Most people don’t do their own renovations – but call in contractors. If this is the most readily available materials, this may be a factor. (Again, not an excuse, but a factor.) And if some of these contractors come from aforementioned communities, they won’t see this as a problem.

    I also think that housing costs in NYC and the pressure for multi-unit home conversions (with more parking needs) makes a difference, too.

    Let me state once again that these are not an excuse, but rather other possible explanations and factors of what is going on.

27. What a fucking tragedy.

28. To each his own, but really!!!!!!!! What a bloody awful shame. Gaudy and tackiness will always win out i’m afraid!

29. Horrifying. Just horrifying.

30. That is a tasteless and pointless exterior renovation. Especially considering the history of the original owner.

31. I have tears in my eyes. How could they do that to that (once) gorgeous house?! Poor Nancy must be turning in her grave… Preservation is so important!

32. good point, Lynda!

33. What a sad, sad story. To see that amazing house be completely ruined – the owners had choices, they just didnt use them. Hope that street gets landmarked soon! or other abominations will most likely follow.

34. That is truly sad. Also sad? The excuse. Carpenter ants necessitated all that concrete? Carpenter ants necessitated those hideous perched birds? Gross.

35. There’s no accounting for taste…

36. Really? How can anyone do something like THIS?

37. This whole upset is really quite funny. Things change daily- even by the second. To be alarmed at a home being renovated is one of the funniest things I’ve heard all day. I hope we can all use our passionate energies toward issues that are truly important. Let us not become Gestapos of one another, biting at each other’s heels on matters of appearance.

    1. Really? At the very least, you must agree it’s a bit sad this was torn down, right? Or is this interchangeable with the current Penn Station? http://www.nyc-architecture.com/GON/gon-penn6.jpg

    2. Nice try new owner!

    3. Amanda, it’s the little things that make up life. If you save up all your indignation for only the really “important” issues, then you’ll never change anything.

    4. Oh Amanda. If you really believe it’s all about “appearance”…I feel so sorry for you. So sincerely and heartily sorry.

38. WORKING FOR MANY YEARS RICHMOND HILL, AREA AROUND FOREST PARK, AND SEVERAL LOCATIONS HAD MAGNIFICENT HOMES, TO SAVE THEM WAS KEY. HOWEVER TO NEW FOLKS ENTERING THESE NEIGHBORHOODS THEY HAVE THEIR OWN STYLE. THE SAME THING IS DONE TO BEECHHURST, NOW LOADED WITH MACMANSIONS.

39. It is a sad story. The original house was beautiful. Seems to be a case of too much money and too little taste.

40. 🙁

41. What a beautiful house. It’s a same that it wasn’t preserved.

42. My family is from Richmond Hill and as residents, we cringe every time we pass by the latest disaster of a home renovation. Richmond Hill is a beautiful neighborhood but without Nancy, I’m afraid it might lose its lovely, historical Victorian homes. Thank you for sharing the story.

43. This kind of renovation, on a smaller, and often even less artful (if you can imagine) scale, goes on in Kensington, Brooklyn, constantly. It’s a source of never-ending disgust. It’s nauseating. They even brick over the chimneys.

44. I can see why they put brick up. Carpenter ants don’t eat brick. However they do eat wood. What I would have like to have seen is the restoration. I would think that carpenter ants being carpenter ants they won’t stop at eating just the siding. They’d also eat the studs. This being said they should have had to restud the entire down stairs, not an easy process and if you’re going to go all that way, why oh why use brick for the exterior? There are a lot of non wood/non vinyl siding products out there that would be a lot better to use than brick!

    I geuss they’ve never heard or Orkin.

45. Beautiful house. It is a shame that it had to be renovated, but at the very least they kept the original shape, windows etc. I did notice and it may just be the trees, but in the 6th photo down in the window on the right – the shadows kind of look like a figure??

46. Come to the area of Forest Hills just north of Queens Boulevard for an array of these god-awful nouveau-immigrant styled McMansions. Makes me sick. This story makes my heart ache.

47. The original house was so charming and obviously loved and had a wonderful aura about it. Then I found myself gasping, slack jawed, and in disbelief at the “renovation”. What a shame! What is wrong with people? There is no accounting for taste, as they say.

48. thank you for sharing this story. hopefully it will help keep the charm of nyc alive. mcmansions simply have no place here.

49. Did the new owners move from Jersey Shore? That would explain some of the unfortunate decisions, I guess.

    By the way, carpenter ants do not eat healthy wood– that is, wood that is unaffected by rot. I live in an old house in a historic district and have worked on homes, including my own. It’s not that hard, nor significantly more expensive to respect the integrity of the house’s design and intention.

    This is just a crass lack of taste and respect.

50. This looks like every POS faux mansion in the Hasidic neighborhood in Brooklyn. Come down to Avenue I or J, you’ll see they’re a dime a dozen. Unfortunately, that house was perfect the way it was until they put up that Floridian mess.

51. This is nothing more than vile criminality, and the new owners should be prosecuted for foisting this abomination on an already-reeling city. I don’t care if this is your architectural heritage, if it’s that important to you stay in your own country and buy or build a tacky, tasteless house there. Don’t come to the US and destroy our history, we have enough Americans already willing to do – and doing – that.

    20 years ago I was doing a major faux-paint job in a house in a NJ community of Arts & Crafts houses – the whole neighborhood had been built around the same time, all the houses were of generally the same shape and size, it was a charming glimpse into the past. The house next to the one I was working in – wraparound columned porch, central hallway with bifurcating staircase to the second floor, original woodwork and stained glass, etc. – had been sold, and the new owner planned to bulldoze it and the original carriage house and build a McMansion out to the lot lines. The woman whose place I was working in was thrilled, could not wait for the old, lovely, sheltering edifice next to her to be razed. Broke my heart, wish I could have bought it myself to preserve it. Still wonder what went up in its place; still wonder why the woman hated that house so much; wonder how she wound up liking her new neighbor.

52. Why? Why would someone destroy a house like that? Why??

53. I met Nancy in 1996 and by 1998 we formed the Richmond Hill Historical Society – I was the Founding President and Nancy took the batton in about 2001. Together, with a team of dedicated Board Members, we promoted the Victorian gems and verdant allure of Richmond Hill. Nancy purchased her home at an auction and as it turned out; it was the home of Henry Haugaard’s mother – Henry was the Architect of some 900 homes in Richmond Hill, Woodhaven and vicinity. Nancy was a dynamo and her loss was much deeper than that house alone. Upon her loss we failed to have it Landmarked and the LPC was resistant every step of the way as we promoted a historic district in Richmond Hill. “Carpenter ants”? I think theire are isolated treatments for such problems: you don’t need to put the baby “to the sword” to kill a tick. Let’s face it: if you wanted to buy a house in Howard Beach in the New Howard Beach “style” of architectural mish-mash brought to you by Home Depot… perhaps you should have purchased a home in Howard Beach.

54. Here in Queensland Australia we often see the same thing happening with our old high set wooden homes. They get gutted and clad, and the verandahs closed in to make more rooms and all their character is gone. My mum and dad have an original condition Queenslander (as they are called) and it’s a wonderful house. Unfortunately a previous owner cut all the trees down because he only liked lawn. Including the palm trees that were contemporary to the house from the original garden.

55. I lived in Richmond hill my whole life,25 years. Both houses you took pictures of I remember them as a child and in my teen years. I know exactly where both houses are. This is a sad sorry and I loved reading it.

56. There is a web site called Queens Crap that deals with this issue. Also Kevin Walsh at forgotten-ny holds no truck for this form of BS.
    In my youth I lived in a walkup in Long Island City and thus had no exposure to this type of architecture. i can only wonder what kind of Philistine would do something like this

57. Why do so many people accept this cultural relativism bullshit? It behooves people from other countries to at least attempt to understand the culture they’re moving too. Yes, wood houses are for poor people in south asia. Brick is for the well-to-do. So we’ll just brick over a wood house in perfect repair! If they don’t like it they’re just jealous!

58. This upsets me.

59. I was born in Richmond Hill (although into an “Archie Bunker house,” not one of the Victorian beauties), and this is just heartbreaking…maybe the owners, like some of those profiled in the New York Times awhile back, wanted to spare their family the terror of “diseases and worms”:
    http://crazystable.squarespace.com/journal/2005/11/29/ticks-and-disease-and-worms-and-stuff.html

60. I like the old house and respect everyone else’s desire for landmark protection, but as new houses go I think the new one is perfectly fine too. I must be from a different planet or something.

    1. I’d suggest reading “The Geography of Nowhere.” It gives you a feel for what we are fast losing (the same feel this site gives you) and opens your eyes to the greater loss to the community and country as a whole when our culture and history are thrown away, piece by piece.

61. This reminds me of “Beetlejuice” when the new owner says, “If you don’t let me gut out this house and make it my own, I will go insane AND TAKE YOU WITH ME!” OK…

62. I really hope there is no internet in heaven, the “soprano-ing” of that gorgeous painted lady has me sick to my stomach, I can’t imagine how Nancy would feel. WHY do people buy in these beautiful areas only to ruin the whole vibe with one nasty reno? These historical homes should be preserved. So short sighted. yuck. poo.

63. I hope they at least gave those windows, columns and front door to Build It Green. Oh God I feel sick.

64. Very sad – but don’t lose hope. With some work, it can be re-restored to the original splendor. We help make this happen all the time. Abby J is correct – it is very short sighted.

65. Will someone who knows the address of this do me the favor of printing out the comments and mailing it to them?
    I bet they think it has been restored and will command an upgraded price.

66. There’s a lot I could say, but I’ll keep it simple –

    That is one ugly porch.

67. RE: Lalaland, who wrote “It’s not to my liking either, but does it count for something that it’s done very nicely according to a different aesthetic?”.

    No offense, but this is relativist pap. A significant historical home, with a high degree of architectural integrity, was butchered by someone who purchased it on a whim with little or no understanding of the economic and cultural value of the property.

    This is not subjective. The principles of traditional architecture are well established and based on the intellectual and cultural achievements of 5,000 years of civilization.

    The deliberate and inept application of cheap, mass produced “traditional” architectural elements does not constitute a valid alternative aesthetic point of view. This is commodity construction designed to appeal to the least common denominator. Simply put, this is kitsch.

    1. I agree with Lalaland that this is a different aesthetic of an immigrant community – one I may venture to say is typically more newly well-to-do. That being said – Lakeplanner, I think you are absolutely correct. Imagine if the reverse were happening – American expats moving into historic neighborhoods and doing this.

       This is the neighborhood I live in and I am always sickened when I see lovely homes covered with fake brick, the yard concreted over, who knows what happening to the interior detail.

       In an earlier post, Ivan Mrakovcic said the LPC wouldn’t get landmark it. Well shame on them for not having a vision for this unique, irreplaceable neighborhood. But then again, it takes vision to see the future. Afterall the French Quarter in New Orleans was nearly razed until a group of visionaries stopped it.

       1. Thanks for the response Anne. I’m a professional urban planner with a background in urban design and historic preservation. Where I work in Central Florida, the oldest homes only go back to the early part of the last century – around 1905 or so. Most of the homes in our historic neighborhoods date from the 1920s and 30s and consist mostly of Craftsman and Spanish Revival style bungalows, along with local vernacular styles (e.g. Florida Cracker).

          Termites are a huge issue down here, yet we still manage to do a decent job preserving our relatively limited historical building stock. So, you can imagine my response when I read that carpenter ants were the justification for this monstrosity.

          As someone below commented, it takes a lot of money to look to this cheap. According to Zillow, the home last sold in December of 2009 for $555,000. See http://tinyurl.com/74nt3m6

          Sorry, but I don’t buy Ms. Harricharan’s argument that they couldn’t afford to maintain the facade. You don’t spend that kind of money on an immaculate historic home, only to destroy it’s value through the application of cheap vinyl windows, vinyl soffits, vinyl beadboard, stucco and fake brick veener, unless you’re a callous fool who has too much money and too little common sense.

    2. Interesting, I just showed this to a friend from South America. When she saw the renovation, she said, “oh, how nice.” Really??

68. I wonder why the new owners didn’t just flatten it to the ground and start again.
    Cannot believe this Nick, lots of hearts along with yours are breaking over this.
    May Nancy rest in peace indeed.

69. I’m not sure why they took down all of those lovely trees in the back yard. Now they have a great view of…..someone else’s back yard.

70. I drive around eastern CT, where I am now living, and get sick to my stomach when I see the mutilation and destruction of historic houses and magnificent trees. I want to jump out of my car and scream at these idiots. But that would do no good. People need educatin’. The only way to prevent all our history from going down the Home Depot sewer is with preservation and education. People just don’t know any better. Someday the earth will reclaim all of this. But why do we have to suffer the idiots in the meantime?

71. I’m an Architect- Unfortunately I see too much of this. Good quality buildings with design integrity (often constructed at high cost for their time, or in traditional ways that would cost a fortune today) being destroyed to put up cheap, tacky, poorly designed buildings.
    So often we have to push and argue to retain well designed, well constructed buildings, and update/ re-use them sensitively.
    Too often people’s first instinct is to pull down the old & build something cheap. It is like going backwards.
    Unfortunately, the majority of people have little education & appreciation for the built environment, despite its importance in everyone’s quality of life.

72. I have seen this kind of thing more often than I would care too. This is awful. Why bother investing in a beautiful historic home only to turn it into a suburban stereotype. I can only hope that they, at the very least, took the old doors and windows to a salvage place. It does scare me to think what they might have done to the interior.

73. I think it looked better before. I’m also generally a supporter of preservation. Having said that, if this house was of such historical significance, why didn’t the author of this post or any of the commenters on the board purchase it in order to preserve it? It’s really easy to tell someone that they should spend their own according to your tastes. But the fact is that these new people owned the house, they wanted a different look, and they didn’t break the law in order to achieve it.

    1. This is a failure of the Landmarks Commission. They should’ve required the owners to do any repair work to remain true to the house’s architectural history. The point of the Commission is to protect places like this from the blinding ignorance of people who purchase and then alter without realizing (or maybe just not caring) about the damage they’re doing. The Commission simply did not do its job. Shameful.

74. I was born and bred in Richmond Hill, 106th St., near Forest Park. I now live in the Paris area. I sold my family’s house when the last inhabitant passed away because I could not keep it. It had deteriorated. But something is wrong in Richmond Hill, and other areas of Queens. It’s that so many neighborhoods in NYC have renovated, become trendy, yes – gentrified beyond reason – but better connected to Manhattan to permit people to commute more easily to work.. None of this was ever done for Richmond Hill. The old Jamaica Avenue El still rattles deafeningly by, day and night, going basically nowhere. The few remaining businesses are basically Mom and Pop stores. The area will not attract the young and dynamic if transportation doesn’t improve (I used to take an hour and a half to get to Midtown Manhattan, between the slow infrequent bus and the subway) and some financial help (tax credits, whatever) should be made available to encourage people to restore. How about a “Queens Heights”, to complement Brooklyn Heights ?

75. Beautiful and thoughtful post.

    That renovation is hideous and so sad–they turned that spectacular house into an eyesore.

76. This story made me shed tears. A real sense of loss, even though I’m not from Queens and never lived there. But the house was a true thing of beauty that has been carelessly ripped to shreds.
    The front view looks like a bucktoothed Donald Duck.
    I agree with the comments about cultural sensitivity – if you’re moving to a new neighborhood you should be sensitive to maintaining the existing appearance. It’s called being a good neighbor. Presumably the appearance is what drew you to move there in the first place!
    Can you imagine if someone decided that the Eiffel Tower should be more functional with vinyl siding? Or that the Statue of Liberty ought to be “updated” by making her look more like Rosy the Riveter?
    This is a loss for all Americans, not just those from Queens.

77. Ok – I agree- it is tragic that her house was not protected – HOWEVER – to go off on the people who bought it and insult the way they decided to redesign THEIR home is beyond rude and arrogant. I have been a part of historical preservation initiatives, and yes, there are many structures worth preserving for their historical value and what they bring to the community. But there are times when people go overboard. Trying to maintain the look of a whole community just because some people think that is a more classy or more interesting style is snobbery at its worse. And it is counterproductive to creating a sustainable city. If you love that style so much, buy the house and maintain that style. If you can’t afford the house, and you chose to live somewhere else, then who should be paying to maintain the look of a house that would cost a fortune trying to meet the standards of the historical preservation society? You want the tax payers to foot that bill? If enough people loved that look so much, someone would have bought the place for that look. We have become a society that has abused our powers. Historical preservation was never meant to preserve things just because we liked the character of it. It was meant to preserve things that had HISTORICAL VALUE and that were rare enough that wihtout preservation, that type of structure will never be seen again. A movie theater from the 1900s that has the original screen and the original ceilings – and is only 1 of 4 left in the country – that is a worthy cause. It is a tourist attraction and it can generate revenue. Someone’s house – if they were famous and important to history – that makes sense. And yes, this house may have made sense to preserve based on its owner – but there are still plenty of those houses that are preserved and so people can still see what it used to be like.
    I have a friend who lives in a house that was marked as historical – and they can’t even put in a handicap ramp for their mother who lives with them. These people didn’t tear down this place and turn it into a McDonalds – they didn’t build a McMansion – they didn’t do anything really other than change the color and some other typical modern updates that many people make these days. Do I agree with those updates? Nope. But should i or anyone else be judging them based on their TASTE? Their style? They come from a different culture – why should everyone who comes to this country adhere to what everyone else believes is beautiful. You are all a bunch of snobs and it makes me realize why I stopped getting involved in historical preservation issues.

    1. Adam, you have a rather limited understanding of the purpose of historic preservation. The field has long since moved past the simplistic notion that only those buildings that are individually significant (i.e. someone famous lived there) or the last of their kind (i.e. your example of the 1900s movie theater) should be preserved only as historical curiosities that generate tourism dollars. Jane Jacobs, in her numerous writings, understood the value of historical preservation and would disagree with your assertion that it is counterproductive to creating a sustainable city.

78. Its not like these people bought this house saying “i can’t wait to make it look like something no one likes- and i’m glad they didn’t preserve it so I can have it” They had nothing to do with the decision for historical preservation. They simply found a house that was in a location they wanted to live in and met their needs for price and size. Who the hell are all of you to judge them. You want to judge someone – judge the township – and even them – you can’t fault because they would be on the hook for figuring out how to afford to preserve another house. You know how much these areas rely on property taxes for their revenues? You think it’s cheap to preserve whole blocks of houses in the NYC metro area? The woman should have pushed to have her house preserved before the others. But if the point of preserving the houses was to ensure people can see the history of the area, and to appreciate the architecture – the goal was achieved as through the other houses that were preserved. So please, stop ripping these people up. They don’t deserve it. No one forced any of you to live in that house or look at it. You can go spend your money to preserve whatever house you want to preserve.

79. Hearing comments like “yuck – what a disaster” is pathetic. I wonder what your house was before you had it. For all you know, before you had your house – there was a really cool looking tent or wood cabin where someone lived or sold beer. And now your ugly big house with air conditioning and cable tv is there. Think about that.

80. And finally – to the writer of the article – you should be ashamed of the way you are portraying this family who bought this house and demonizing them for doing something that everyone in this country hopes to do one day – own a home and make it theirs.

    1. Adam –

       As you wrote: “It is tragic that her house was not protected.”

       Exactly when did I say anyone who owns this home did not have the right to make any and all changes they wanted to? Of course they have that right.

       I’ll reiterate my final paragraph:

       “We ALL benefit from people like Nancy Cataldi long after they pass, and while it’s cute to name streets after preservationists, it’s a lot more important to carry on their legacy. Hopefully, this is a reminder of that.”

       The point of my post is to remind people what can happen to unprotected historic homes. If you see these pictures and feel strongly, you can carry on Nancy’s legacy by becoming active in historic preservation. If you do not feel strongly, you can choose to ignore it and live with the changes.

       It’s as simple as that.

81. Every single person commenting on this article has probably gone shopping on New York’s famous 5th Avenue. Well shame on you all. You should have boycotted all those evil stores because on those very spots in the 1800s stood some of the most beautiful mansions in the United States, built by the Vanderbuilts and the Astors. Torn down to make way for commerce and retail. Shame on you all for buying Abercrombie & Fitch and Hollister on very spot nearly 150 years ago were built America’s castles. Pleaaaaaaaaase. If someone wants to buy a house that is not a protected house and rennovate it to their tastes, that is their right. If all these people complaining about it wanted to do something, they should have donated to this cause, bought the house and left it open as a museum. If the house, which had 100 years of wear and tear on it did not sell because nobody wanted to leave it exactly as it was, it would probably fall into dissrepair and be used as a crack house or abandoned eye sore. Go into Newark, NJ sometime and see if you would like to live on the street with all those decrepid yet historic houses. This article is so biased and one sided, it is almost funny if it weren’t for all the people with their fake sympathy. If you are really that sad about this open your wallets and give money and maybe all the houses that are ever built will stay still exactly as they are in the very moment they were constructed.

    1. Dirk –

       Exactly how is this article biased? You wrote: “If someone wants to buy a house that is not a protected house and rennovate it to their tastes, that is their right.”

       I FULLY, 100% agree, and never said otherwise. Let me reiterate my final paragraph:

       “We ALL benefit from people like Nancy Cataldi long after they pass, and while it’s cute to name streets after preservationists, it’s a lot more important to carry on their legacy. Hopefully, this is a reminder of that.”

       The point of my post is to remind people what can happen to unprotected historic homes. If you see these pictures and feel strongly, you can carry on Nancy’s legacy by becoming active in historic preservation. If you do not feel strongly, you can choose to ignore it and live with the changes.

       It’s as simple as that.

    2. Wow, that just breaks my heart! But I refuse to slam them in the same manner as I’ve seen on this board. I totally disagree with what they’ve done, but I wouldn’t want to see this much hate come in MY direction. That being said…

       Dirk, I agree totally with your comment, “on those very spots in the 1800s stood some of the most beautiful mansions in the United States, built by the Vanderbuilts and the Astors”. It’s a crying shame our recent ancestors took the same short-sighted attitude as we clearly have today.

       Adam, look at the bigger picture not just about reasons YOU might save a historic building.

       What everybody is missing in all of this is that we, as a country, have destroyed so much of our history ALREADY. We are such a young country in comparison to Europe, for instance. So our historical buildings are not as note worthy, spectacular or as OLD as some of the rest of the world. But what if the people in those countries had done what we have done? What if they had decided the Coliseum needed to be a new football/soccer stadium? If the Leaning Tower of Pisa was torn down because it was too unstable? Just put up a new building that stands up straight! Think of all those amazing buildings in other parts of the world that would have been destroyed ages ago just because they were OLD!

       This house was simply beautiful and beloved by Nancy and she apparently spent a lot of time and money to restore it to it’s original glory. This house was OUR history people! Does this not MEAN anything to you folks who are seeing ‘no big deal’ here?

       We can’t do a damn thing about the horrible destruction that NYC felt was necessary so many years ago. I’m sure to them it was like tearing down an eyesore shed in your back yard and putting up a shiny new one. However, we CAN do something about the buildings we have left. We SHOULD be preserving the things that were built well and were MEANT to stand the test of time (at least as much as they knew how). When all we build now is crap that is meant to be replaced every couple of years or so, we should appreciate what is left from our forefathers. Or are we counting on other countries to preserve THEIR history so we can bulldoze ours?

       While I understand that the new homeowners had a right to do what they wanted with their new home, why didn’t they spend that $555K on a new home? Clearly they spent an enormous amount of money to ‘upgrade’ this once stately home to their version of beauty. Why didn’t they take an old eyesore somewhere else and spend all of that cash rebuilding that, or maybe something new? Why move into an area where their idea of ‘beauty’ was clearly out of place with the rest of the neighborhood? Why didn’t Nancy say something in her will about her home? meh

       I also understand the comments made about someone being totally restricted from making needed adjustments to their historically protected home. I don’t see why there can’t be well-built additions, such as a wheelchair ramp, made where necessary. Clearly this was not something that was a consideration for people back then. But I bet they would have if it had been an option. In an effort to maintain the historical appearance, perhaps a ramp could be tastefully integrated somehow in the rear where most people have to seem to park anyway? It seems like there should be some sort of compromise without destroying the basic history of a home. I think there are bad things occurring on both sides of this coin. 🙁

       I thoroughly agree that there should have been something done by the historical society to preserve this home. Perhaps they tried and these people had more money? I don’t know, but I just cannot believe that these homes are being abandoned to people who either don’t care or who don’t understand their significance.

       I live in Tucson, Arizona and the oldest homes here were built in the early 1900’s. There might even be some that were built in the late 1800’s. But they are NOT the magnificent, well-built, meant-to-last-a-long-frickin-time kind of buildings and homes that exist back east. My STATE isn’t as old as some of the buildings we’re talking about here! I’m disgusted at how easy it is for people to let go of their history! I’m ashamed of all the people who think ‘out with the old and in with the new’. We’d have nothing left in this world of our combined history if THEY had all felt that way. Think about THAT before you casually write off all these old homes.

82. The two large eagle statues at the front walkway sum up the renovation for me.

    Tacky.

83. And by the way … one day, people might consider it an interesting and humorous historical footnote to see the garish, tacky and ugly looking casino style houses in Queens, Staten Island and Long Island. If so, this house will be preserved for that kitche and everyone will eat their words. The way the economy is going, if we are not more careful New York and the rest of the US will be owned by China and India anyways and I am sure they will be much less interested in preserving vs. building factories full of slave labor in the NYC area. Seriously.

84. What an embarrassment.

85. Wow! This house was so beautiful, it had so much character! 🙁

86. Hey Adam and the homeowners: YOU DON’T WANT TO TAKE CARE OF AN OLD HOME DON’T BUY ONE!!! Guy to the burbs and buy a cookie cutter piece of crap house. The new owners of this house are FULL OF SHIT! The porch did not need replacement, nor did the windows or the front doors due to “carpenter ants” They wanted new doors and windows to feel that they were improving on energy efficiency. They spent a hell of a lot of money on the changes they did make when they could have easily spent that money buying storm windows, storm doors and repairing the front porch. These new owners I hope are haunted for life. I HATE people that buy a house that has been perfectly fine for 100+ years only to put their disgusting changes on it. Would we retouch the Mona Lisa if the paint were flaking or print a new declaration of independence simply because the old one was torn? Save me your bullshit stories and stop buying old houses you disgusting savages. I’m sickened by your lack of taste, RESPECT and intelligence. Please just stay in the suburbs with your crappy town houses and leave the history to those who care about it.

87. So sad to see these kinds of things happen. This is why protecting these neighborhoods and having Historic Landmark preservation rules in place are essential if we are going to truly preserve these architectural gems. Funny how the new owners said they had no choice because of capenter ants. Is that why they changed the windows too? Ewww….Thankful for people like Nancy who made a difference and brought more awareness. I’m sad that her propsal was rejected…..

88. This is architectural malpractice of the first degree!! Absolutely heinous!!!

89. They took elegance and made it cheesy. How sad.

90. That makes me feel ill, as someone who lives in an 1894 Victorian, in an historic district. If you are ever looking for Victorians, Tudor Revivals, Colonials (real Colonials, not Colonial Revivals) check out South Orange, NJ. Lots of beautiful historic houses, some giant mansions, and some more modest homes. And from the right angle, it could be 100 years ago. When I look out my front parlor window, it could be 100 years ago, because the surrounding houses are all built in the 19th century.

91. Oh, and we have working gas lamps lighting our streets!

92. Wow, what a truly soulless home they transformed that old character-filled beauty into… Truly sad!

93. Cripes that’s an ugly Reno! I don’t see the point to the brick…is that even real brick? I don’t really know much about the styles of homes, but it seems they were trying to go for a craftsman look? What is the point in buying a pretty Victorian and trying to turn it into something else?

94. One shot of the newly renovated house seems to be exposing a rather demonic grin

95. This is the saddest thing I’ve ever seen. I spent some part of most childhood summers at my great-aunt and great-uncle’s house on 105th St. in Richmond Hill.

96. L-O-S-E-R-S!

97. That is one insenative gut job. They say they had carpenter ants and needed to replace all the siding and porch. Remove all the interesting detail that made the house unique, in order to install the same big box windows, doors and spindles so common everywhere.

    When they replace everything on a house to be consistant it will likely cost more than replacing only the few damaged parts.

    Like I have heard before “people don’t know how much it costs to look this cheap”
    rick

98. The new owners lack of respect for historic preservation and beautiful architecture made me think of my one of my husband’s favorite sayings. “The only taste they have is in their mouth”

99. Very sad…It must have taken a pretty penny to gut the porch, etc., and put in all that concrete, brick and fencing, not to mention taking all those trees and bushes down. Why not take that money and bring it back to it’s original glory ? Some elbow grease and diy would have taken care of the bushes and weeds. It doesn’t have to be instant gratification. Many restorations or improvements take years for some of us to accomplish.

100. Minus some kind of conspicuous shiny chrome, this renovation has the earmarks of Bukharan immigrants.

     Bukharans hail from an arid, desert-like part of Uzbekistan, and in a seeming effort to recreate their homeland in the temperate Northeast, generally cut down trees, pave over grass and flowers, and to for a rather fortress-like ostentation.

     They probably don’t like the idea of the high water bills it takes to keep up greenery over the summer.

     Hopefully the Bukharans will follow the classic US immigrant pattern and eventually leave New York and head west. Their whole aesthetic would be a lot more suitable for places that resemble their homeland, like New Mexico, Texas or Arizona.

     In the meantime, citizens in historic neighborhoods better wake up and enact strict zoning laws lest they be turned into concrete deserts. Thank heavens Sunnyside Gardens was landmarked as a historic district.

Comments are closed.