Going Brick On Norwood

Great job redoing the house, but one quick question. I don't understand the little jut-out producing the faux roofline. You see this all the time in suburban homes and new builds, I just don't get it at all. What is the benefit of extending that portion of the house out 18 inches?

Interesting choices. Not unattractive, but I would have kept the porch and the bay window.

Glad to see so many houses be rehabbed, in any case. I've been noticing quite a few projects on Lafayette between Richmond and Grant lately, which rather gives lie to the notion that these streets are turning into slums in a hurry.

What they doing with the other three sides of the house?

Very nice curb appeal!

My compliments to the contractor and owner!

Seeing rehabs while on the GardenWalk is a great added visual treat for the whole event.

Is it just me, or are the shutters on the second floor of the bump out bowed out at the middle?

This is very nicely done and looks quite nice. It also maintains the siting of the original house, so that's great. That peak-in-peak gable is a very popular contemporary design and looks a little place-less. Call me a hater, but I can't help but feel that this contemporary colonial redo pales in comparison to the original colonial revival style of the house, with it's non-standard angles and varied windows. It also looks like the redesign lost the attic as usable space and the house seems shorter without attic windows. Ultimately, it's great to see people moving in and bettering the neighborhood, and this is certainly an enormous improvement. However, I just can't help but feel it falls a little short. Call me a perfectionist.

This belongs in Amherst, not Buffalo.

Some of you are plain a-holes! This is somebody's home in which they invested 10's of thousands of their hard earned dollars. Cut them some slack if you do not like their finish choices, meaning keep your mouth shut and thank them for choosing this house to invest in and not a house out of the city or state. Maybe everyone here can post pics of your houses and remodeling work and see how you like being judged.

I hope they don't read your comments, I am embarassed for you if they do.

Nice job...I'd like to live there.

I would simply like it if shutters, even when fake, are sized so that if they could close, they would cover the width and height of the window.

It is such a basic design idea, but usually ignored and a bit absurd looking.

I hate to be "that guy", but the house was much more appealing in the before shot.

That being said im glad people are putting money back into rehabs in the city.

I would not complain if something similar to this started filling in empty lots on the west side. As far as renovating the architectural value out of century old buffalo housing stock goes however, im not a fan...

Isn't there a movement to turn the neighborhoods between Elmwood/Delaware to Richmond into an historic district?

Upscale Pratt Willert phase one, but looks great. More please. When will builders start offering infill homes????

While the articles "multi unit eyesore" may be a tiny bit of a stretch this is better than what was there previously. I think it respects the neighborhood wonderfully.

Being a fan of the west side - I am relieved when someone buys a home in the city and puts forth the time, effort and finances to improve it. We need that to turn around our city.
On a different subject - does anyone know what happened to the proposal to start an indoor farmers market on conneticut street?

This is great, I used to live on this block, and walked by this rehab project almost every day from the beginning, I'll have to make my way over to check out the finished product.

Too bad the large leaded glass windows on the sides have been removed and replaced by long blank walls.

This just doesn't work. I think the person responsible for this should see 30 days in jail or hung in a public forum and their family should pay for it all.

It's always good to see an old West Side beauty fixed up and lived in. Kudos to the individual who invested their time and money in the property. Thank you for doing so.

That being said, it's nice, but I think it now looks more like it belongs in a subdivision of nice, cookie-cutter, no-maintenance exterior little boxes on a hillside in Amherst or Lancaster.

My opinion, nothing more.

Here is more information about the Richmond Ashland National Historic District initiative which is gaining steam and to which this property has directly relevance (and, now I do not believe would apply): http://ranhdi.wordpress.com

I really do not think this is a case of suburban versus urban design – rather contemporary versus traditional. I see very little here that truly applies to the suburbs – perhaps contemporary desing cues found in newer homes (most built in the suburbs), but the house itself engages the street and occupies essentially the same foot print as it did originally. Both the before and after photos have some charming and interesting elements to them. In both cases, there are things that do not “float my boat”; however, as brownteeth stated, this “place” is someone’s home and they have invested a lot of time and money into it. Some of the comments I have read here are quite distressing, essentially equating personal taste to legal and personal repercussions. The family or individual behind this renovation should be commended for choosing the city instead of feeding the ever present and easier option sprawl monster.

The interesting thing is that many of the designs we now celebrate as part of our urban landscape smack of “suburban” design. Look at the beautiful Darwin Martin house. There are numerous elements within that complex that one could easily call “suburban”, yet it is given a pass because of Wright’s place in the pantheon of American architects and its vintage. Look at the Robert T. Coles House and Studio at 321 Humboldt Parkway recently discussed here on BRO. So many of the elements of this home subscribe to the suburban design school, yet there was no onslaught of comments decrying this place as the pioneer at “suburbanification” of the city. Why is this?

If one looks at historic homes that have had the good fortune of living through numerous design trends and eras often do not look anything like they did when first built. As the original or subsequent owners became the home’s steward they may or may not have elected to renovate the home to reflect their personal tastes or the design trends of the day. Some of the unfortunate members of this lot look like the house version of Frankenstein’s monster, but others take on an interesting form (or history) as they evolve.

Although certain regulations should be applied to new builds and renovations within the city, I am very wary of the formation of Boards or regulations similar to the HOA witch’s covens – there is a real suburban boogeyman to fear - similar to one would find on planet cul de sac. The city, like its people, should be an interesting mélange that, like a symphony, plays against and with each other to develop an ever interesting and “engagable” space.

Whether you like it or not, kudos to putting money back into a city home.

While it may not be the 'historic' norm of most of the homes in the area, it's not unpleasant - just a modern take.

Actually - why can't the city build homes like this when they knock down houses on the east side and put up new houses... this house sits in a traditional city size lot... instead of the 2 lot wide things they build that DO belong in the burbs.

As someone who lives two doors down from this property, I'd like to point out the problem I have with it, aside from whether it looks as if it "belongs" or not. The problem is that this rehab has been going on FOR TWO YEARS. Months and months go by without any visible activity, and then there appears to be a week or two of frantic scurrying, and then...back to nothing.

It appears the owner had the property landscaped merely to keep the neighbors quiet about the otherwise disheveled appearance of the place. Readers that commented on the "shutters" bowing out are correct- they are indeed bowed.

I feel that as a good neighbor in the City of Good Neighbors, we on the block are dealing with a no-end-in-sight, mostly-incomplete hunk of ugly because the owner improperly budgeted the money or time this project would take (or possibly both.)

Whether you agree with the style of updates chosen is, in a district without official historic designation, irrelevent. Anybody investing in Buffalo should be given a high-five; but they should also understand that cheap(-ish) property does not equal a cheap renovation and should plan accordingly.

Even that small portico would be better than no porch at all!

It is good to see investment in the City of Buffalo, but renovations like this detract from the city's deserved reputation as a place of architectural interest, and Buffalo's architectural preeminence is one of its most important assets.

The city's architectural importance does not only depend on its great buildings designed by famous architects. It also depends on its vernacular residential and commercial architecture, which is distinctive.

The style of this house's new facade is of a very specific style that is ubiquitous in present-day suburban development in many metropolitan areas, for better or for worse (that's a separate argument), and I think it's at least worth considering that it may not look good on a Buffalo street.

Waterford Commons, Clarence NY, by Ryan Homes. Look familiar?

http://www.ryanhomes.com/community/new-york/waterford-commons