Comments on: Beautiful White Building

By: BushwickBK.com » Blog Archive » Bushwick: Safe From the Brownstone Nazis

Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:19:18 +0000

[...] indeed. To prove the point, she posted a photo of a lovely, tall, well-cared-for brownstone — painted shocking white! The [...]

By: Shabudah

Shabudah — Sun, 12 Aug 2007 21:12:22 +0000

I am a Realtor who was born and raised in Bed-Stuy. I love all the building the neighborhood, esp. the brownstones. I ride my bike around and marvel at the awesome faces of many of the brownstones. Keep them natural. In my experience, buyers with big bucks want the old school details inside and outside of their home.

As I began researching the neighborhood in preparation for the sale of a 2 family double duplex home on Madison St(Nostrand Ave), the aforementioned point was brought to my attention.
It’s modern renovations, like the aluminum side paneling, doesn’t fall inline with the ole’ Bed-Stuy charm. In addition, I was saddened to discover that it was not landmarked Stuyvesant Heights.

Upon looking at a map, I discovered that in addition to a few buildings, only the brownstones on the southern side of Macon St(Tompkins/Throop) were landmarked. I live in a frame house on the northern side of the block.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/downloads/pdf/maps/stuyvesant_heights.pdf

By: michael

michael — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:37:35 +0000

they are big and small at once. weird.

By: anon

anon — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 17:06:52 +0000

there are also very lovely cream color brownstones on macon and decatur.

does anyone feel that brownstones are smaller though. only 2 brs usually, and the duplexes can be pain to walk up and down, lots of details in them yes but space, no? any views?

By: babs

babs — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 13:50:16 +0000

There’s a really pretty white one on Vernon between Tompkins and Throop too (south side of the street).

By: The Changeling

The Changeling — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 02:39:04 +0000

I didn’t realize that painting could be so harmful, hancock1. Thanks for the info. Despite being painted, I think this one blends in well with the others on the block.

By: Richard

Richard — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 01:26:03 +0000

I never considered them until I read this, but I counted two on my block (w/ stoops) while walking to the subway. They blend in nicely.

By: hancock1

hancock1 — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 01:10:04 +0000

I should mention that brownstone, a form of sandstone, should not be painted because it destroys the stone. The porous stone is meant to absorb moisture and then let it evaporate again. Painting creates an impermeable layer that allows water to enter but eats away at the bonding elements of the stone. Eventually, as when the paint was removed from my house, all you have left is sand which falls to the ground. Most painted houses had some repairs made with white Portland cement in the past and the the stone was painted to make it all one color again. But not a good idea, please don’t paint brownstone.

By: Alexa11221

Alexa11221 — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 01:03:03 +0000

The hot pink house in Park Slope is in the historic district, I believe. The one on Garfield (? it was on brownstoner too).

I’ve always heard you shouldn’t paint brownstones because bits will crack off, water trapped inside the tiny crevices freezes and expands and can’t evaporate.

My house is brick, though, so I have no firsthand knowledge.

There are houses without stoops in Boerum Hill and elsewhere. Not all row/terrace house were designed with them.

By: Leo

Leo — Wed, 08 Aug 2007 20:17:12 +0000

There is a house on the next block without the stoop and from the inside it seems like it was origially built like that, or if removed, done when they did similar work.