« Community Unity | Home | Bed-Stuy Is Ready For Its Close-Up »
The Battle of Who Could Care Less
By The Changeling | May 10, 2007
Did you know that there was a battle being waged on Lexington near the intersection of Bedford Avenue? The Battle of Lexington and Bedford seems to be one in which two developers are trying to see who can build the ugliest housing using the most non-contextual architecture they could conjure up.
It’s definitely a nail-biter, because both buildings seem to use every trick up their sleeves to fly in the face of contextual architecture. In one corner you have this Friedrich spectacle:
 
Not only is the contrasting color an eyesore, check out the little bonus roof detail they added on top. What is THAT? The townhouses on either side of this property are so well-maintained. They don’t deserve this punishment. And each time they look out of the window they will be reminded of bad architecture since the building doesn’t have the same setback as the others on the block.
If you think that one was bad, take a gander at the contender directly across the street:
This Fedders delight takes the cake. Where do you begin with this one? The centered Fedders boxes? The handwritten “For Sale” sign with the limp balloon attached? The boxed-off roof line? Clearly someone in the neighborhood realized what a POS this was and they picked up the nearest rock and threw it through the second floor window.
 
The Fedders building is placed wayyyyyy ahead of its neighbors. I think the builder of the Fedders building wins the crown for caring the least about making this building fit this block. Those CB3 zoning talks are a day late and a dollar short.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:15 am
You are right on point, these new structures are an abomination. I feel sorry for the community to be forced to endure the de-valuation of their property, and the offense to the craftsmen who built the houses that have stood for over a hundred years. The good news is the older houses will outlive the new thrash.
May 10th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
I just stumbled across this website and I’m super-glad that I did. I moved to Bed-Stuy a month ago (eek!) and I think this site will probably be extremely useful, and definitely informative. Thanks!
May 10th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Yikes. and double yikes! what’s so pathetic to me is when they try to add some aesthetic flair, like the roof thing, or that little diamond. it’s just so embarrassing for everyone involved. i can’t figure out why these buildings would be set closer to the street than the other houses, most fedders houses are set BACK from the street more. but i seem to recall these houses all have big front yards, so maybe that’s why. they should at least paint the sides that stick out!
May 10th, 2007 at 7:03 pm
We are plagued with these in our two story red brick row house neighborhoods down here in Philadelphia. We dont usually get Fedders and Frederich(central air is common) but we do get to enjoy first floor garages with sidewalk curb cuts, simulated fieldstone, and concrete “keystones” floating in cream colored spray on stucco above the windows and doors.
May 10th, 2007 at 8:44 pm
Hey Jodi, thanks for the compliments and welcome to the neighborhood!
Leo, calling these an “abomination” might be an understatement. Everyone needs to see these in person to really get a sense of how bad they are. It’s laughable. I totally agree with you that it’s insulting to the builders of the other homes on the block and to the homeowners on this block.
Jimmy Legs, I don’t understand the little “extras” they like to add, either. If you’re going to build an ugly building, then do it without trying to pretty it up in any way. On the first building why did they put that roof-eyebrow-looking thingy on one side? And why is it that they added those Chiclets-looking white blocks on the sides of the building? It looks like they didn’t have enough so they had to space them out. Weird. And with the Fedders building, just drop the diamond design. It’s not making the building look any better.
May 10th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
Circleinasquare, the first floor garages sound horrible. Here, I often see new construction buildings that have the first level as a garage, but there’s no garage door, so it’s like a square cave that you drive your car into. This is probably going to be hard to picture, but sometimes the first floor parking area is lower than the street so that the mini-driveway is at an extremely steep angle. When the resident parks the car, the tail of the car is sticking upward at about a 60 degree angle. It looks so hideous–like someone is sticking their bum in the air.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:30 pm
I just checked the proposed rezoning map and it covers Classon Avenue on the west, Quincy on the north, Saratoga on the east and Atlantic Avenue on the south. So if you aren’t in the zone, the ugly square multi-family dwellings may still be in your future.
May 11th, 2007 at 4:26 am
Zengine, where did you see the zoning maps? How can residents get more involved in changing these things in our neighborhood? Financially and otherwise….attend CB3 meetings? Will that really help?
May 11th, 2007 at 7:55 am
We should all be attending CB3 meetings. I’m sure those north of Quincy who are involved in redeveloping this part of the nabe are at those meetings. There’s no reason for this work to stop at Quincy other than the considerable amount of vacant land and large parcel development potential on that end. We also need to take up expanding or designating landmark status to parts of the nabe outside of Stuyvesant Heights.
May 11th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
I found the map on NYC.GOV’s site, Department of City Planning, Bedford Stuyvesant South Rezoning, zoomed in view PDF.
May 13th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Yeah we get all that and more here in Bushwick. A lot of them (shock of shocks!) have been for sale for ever. A few of them are actually not totally offensive, and those are the ones with the least attempt at decoration and which are closest to the setback of most of the other houses. I said this before on another blog — worst case, they can be skim-coated with that shiny gray concrete they put on lofts and made to look rather modern. A patch yes, but they’re not a total loss. At least they’re not condos — one person could buy it and tear it down if need be.
May 16th, 2007 at 1:01 am
I would cry if one of these buildings were erected within site line of my home… i would actually cry. Who approves these monstrousities? I think they who ever approves them Hates BED STUY and purposfully encourages them… YUCK!!!!!
May 16th, 2007 at 5:27 am
I agree. I’m disappointed in Bed-Stuy’s leadership (or lack thereof). I would think that this, the uglification of the neighborhood, would be something that local politicians and community boards would want to keep under control given the large brownstone housing stock in the area. These low-quality buildings bring down the value of the whole block.
May 18th, 2007 at 11:34 am
The leadership in this community meet, they don’t make anything happen. They are very organized and going nowhere.
May 18th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Hi, isn’t there some kind of zoning or approval process for these? I can’t believe how horrible they are! I would almost think it was some kind of Photoshop trickery but unfortunately it isn’t.
How could the developer think they look nice? The sad thing is the developer probably thinks it looks incredible and it is a shame the rest of the block isn’t the same beautfil Fedders…