This newly renovated building looms over Palmetto Street between Bushwick and Evergreen Avenues, and while neighbors are happy it’s been rehabilitated, they aren’t thrilled with the paint job. — Photo by Jonathan Mena
The owner of a newly renovated, checkerboard-patterned building at 64 Palmetto Street has begun renting apartments amid mixed reviews on its appearance from neighbors.
Abe Green of Buildings USA, LLC, is the developer of the six-family building near Bushwick Avenue and calls the paint job a "piece of art." Green said his goal was to bring "a new attraction to the neighborhood."
|
Green claims to have rented all but one apartment in the building since last week’s opening — the units range in price from $1000 to $3000, depending on size. The building is named "Ocean Blue Residence" and the color theme runs throughout the apartments with "blue walls, blue lights, and murals on every floor of blue oceans and skies."
It took three coats of paint and over a week to complete the exterior paint job.
"We originally wanted to make condos but the market is so bad so we did rentals instead," said Green. When asked what the tenants think and how neighbors have reacted, Green claims, "everyone has been positive — the paint job must be what attracted the tenants to the building."
Reviews on the building have varied among neighbors. One who has lived in the area for over 20 years and can see the building from his house on Bushwick Avenue, said the building doesn’t bother him at all.
"The man has the right to paint his home the way he sees fit," said David C. as he fixed a door on his brownstone. When asked if he would paint his home the same way, he laughed. "No, I like the way my house looks now."
|
But a retiree who owns a house down the block at the corner of Evergreen Avenue called the building an "eyesore."
"They should have painted it a nice blue. It looks ugly next to all the other houses," she said.
The building has become an attraction of sorts, with passersby in cars slowing down to gawk and small groups of neighbors congregating in front to discuss the color.
"Before they fixed the building it was run down and abandoned. The gangs and the welfare people messed it up," said the corner neighbor. "Now it looks better and it is also very nice inside but I still don’t like the color."
Green said he has plans to renovate more buildings and continue his checkerboard stucco jobs; construction will begin soon in a building on Greene Avenue near Wyckoff that will have a lavender color theme.
"The blue building was run down before we fixed it up. The block is better and people are happy," said the developer.
"I think it was a success."
ilybk October 18th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
great more hipsters moving in the community who the hell can pay 3000 for an apartment. so nice you kick out the hard working middle class to move in the hipsters and what do they contribute to socity. Nothing but there unshowered smells and art… big ******* deal. I bet these Hipsters and Artist are on some type of Public assistance.. ummm get up and get a real job.
Professional Alternative October 18th, 2010 at 3:38 pm
Actually, if you could read you would see that it was specifically NOT hard-working middle-class people kicked out, but NON-working people of NO class that ruined the building and were kicked out, as the neighbors said. Your mention of “hipsters” and “artists” to the effect that they don’t have real jobs and are probably on welfare is random and hysterical, and completely disconnected from reality since, as you mention, the rent is almost $3000.
I get it that you don’t like white people, but make your veiled racism a little less nonsensical in the future. Just for the sake of aesthetics.
Professional Alternative October 18th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
Also daaaaaaaamn that’s ugly. The murals are just tragic. Please, Hasidic developers, you need to just stop trying to ADD decoration, or hire someone who knows what they’re doing. You are permanently defacing the housing stock.
Brandon October 18th, 2010 at 8:00 pm
And this is why I live in Ridgewood. WTF are they thinking?
JoJo October 18th, 2010 at 9:11 pm
i wouldn’t assume that commenter #1 is racist. though it may not be germane to this particular article, there is a legitimate point to be made re the pricing out of middle-class and working-class people. after living in holland for some years, i don’t understand why nyc is all or nothing–in Amsterdam most new developments have a mix of social housing and market-rate housing. a good way to avoid ghettoization.
p.s.–let’s all forget about race and start fixing these real issues of socioeconomic disparities. race is a red herring used to divide and conquer!
Matt October 18th, 2010 at 9:51 pm
“They should have painted it a nice blue. It looks ugly next to all the other houses,” she said.
Yeah, that house next door? A classic mid century example wirh a careful eye to exterior detail. Gimme a break. Blue squares are lame but so are claptrap shitboxes.
paladonia October 19th, 2010 at 8:58 am
From someone who has lived over there for years, that building used to house a very dangoerous lot that would hang out all night and day drinking brweaking windows and dooing drugs. The buidling was in complete disrepair and there was also a dead body found in the parking lot next door. This building is a lot prettier than it used to be and I welcome it.
luis ramos October 19th, 2010 at 9:26 am
Funny That The Developer Does Not mention That In The Parking Lot next Door The Body Of A Unknown Female Was Found between Two Parked Cars…..
ricmac01 October 19th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
$1000 and $3000 apartments in the same building? I wonder what’s going on inside this place. Most of the renovated houses in this neighborhood rent apartments from $1200 to $1550, depending on size and type of renovation.
g October 19th, 2010 at 4:33 pm
oye! I just rode by that this weekend had to turn around and take a pic for myself. what a mess. Not sure what neighbors like it, all I spoke with laugh at it and laugh at how many people turn around and come back to look.
Whatevs October 19th, 2010 at 4:51 pm
Haters gonna hate.
mopar October 19th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Oh, that parking lot.
Bizarre and unattractive exterior paint job.
The rest of it looks nice. The windows look very nice.
Dangerpooz October 19th, 2010 at 5:08 pm
I dunno, I saw it the other night… The outside is fun, maybe not the most awesome building in the world, but gives some color and vibrancy to otherwise drab street.
I’m not a fan of interior murals.
rudy October 19th, 2010 at 6:05 pm
Well I think its Awsome!! Gives the block an uplift!!
tyler October 19th, 2010 at 7:01 pm
i think its different as someone said earlier it uplift a drab block i like it
Nino October 20th, 2010 at 12:45 am
This reminds me of some of the the jackass’s that paint brownstone entry and stoops.
These people should be put in jail or shipped back to the banana republics where any crap flys.
All that crap is gonna lift, peel and look nasty. It will then cost 10X as much to bring it back.
They could have left the front traditional, then again I dont know whats worse vinyl, Eurofucco or this ?
Most these old buildings including mine were made with gravel colored asphalt “gasoline” siding See-http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-gasoline-siding.htm
It looked great but torched to easy (1977)and why many of those houses are now gone
tenant advocate October 20th, 2010 at 11:52 am
When is this classist website going to stop celebrating gentrification, tenant harassment, and displacement and talk about the real issues this neighborhood is confronting? Why are you spending your time doing feature stories glorifying the Hassidic landlord mafia? Try doing some legitimate journalism for once and investigate the real history of these buildings, instead of just quoting one person off the street that says that the “welfare people messed it up.” The former tenants were probably constructively evicted through the denial of basic services (such as heat and hot water) as HPD records indicate (you can check open violations and complaints here: http://www.nyc.gov/html/hpd/html/home/home.shtml).
I guess we can expect such biased, classist reporting from a website that receives so much real-estate industry advertising money.
monique October 20th, 2010 at 1:27 pm
dear god, it looks like a giant urinal mint.
to “tenant advocate” above, if you would follow this blog more closely before making such broad, knee-jerk accusations, i think you would find that this website very frequently chronicles issues and instances of tenant harassment, political corruption, and general shady behavior. start with the Community Board write-ups, or the recent coverage of Vito Lopez’s shameless antics, or the frequent discussions of housing laws and policies in the comments.
this website has been my go-to spot for bushwick issues since it started a few years ago. perhaps you’re unaware, but bushwick does not have a local newspaper, nor any other blogs that cover bushwick/ridgewood news with the same regularity and detail. this is an accessible-to-everyone medium that is free and Google Translate-able and which connects info-seeking residents to local resources (housing info, nonprofits, farmers markets) and free events and encourages them to support local businesses, whether it’s a taco stand or bike repair shop. Best of all, bushwickbk welcomes contributors, just like yourself! so why don’t you put on your OWN journalism pants and make some sense out of those HPD links for us?
I am not in any way affiliated with this blog aside from my long-time readership. But I think it is a valuable resource in a community that has historically struggled, and continues to struggle, from a lack of specialized resources and attention.
i live here too October 20th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
this building and its renovation are not clelbrating gentrification. you would have had to experience what this building was before it has been renovated. the building was a home for squatters that engaged in prostitution, drug dealing and gang activities. I am sure they were also involved with the murder that had happend in the parking lot next door. among all of this there were kids living here too.
Matt October 20th, 2010 at 2:51 pm
Or, my shorter version of monique’s reply to tenant advocate:
Blow it out your ass.
tenant advocate October 20th, 2010 at 4:10 pm
Maybe I’ve overlooked it, but I’ve never seen this blog cover how rent-regulated tenants in Bushwick are being driven from their homes through egregious landlord harassment. Records show that this building has 135 outstanding HPD violations. This looks like yet another case of landlords denying basic services and repairs in order to get tenants out.
Despite the landlord’s purported objective of bringing “a new attraction to the neighborhood,” it’s important to realize that most landlords do renovations in order to try to raise the rents. They also like to pass heat and hot water costs onto the tenants by installing separate systems. Often they lack permits to do these renovations and illegally raise the rents more than they are allowed to.
Everyone living at 64 Palmetto or any other 6+ unit building in the neighborhood can fight to maintain their apartments’ rent-regulated status. You should obtain a copy of your rent history from DHCR at 55 Hanson Place and see if you are being overcharged.
Also, you can look up HPD complaints and violations for any building by typing the address in the “Compaints, Violations and Registration Information” tab on the right hand side of the HPD homepage: http://www.nyc.gov/html/hpd/html/home/home.shtml.
John Dereszewski October 20th, 2010 at 7:56 pm
While this building may now seem anamolous, the passage of time might make a big difference. When I moved into Forest Hills about 10 years ago, an old abandoned warehouse on Queens Blvd. had just been converted into mixed housing/commercial space. It was designed in a kind of teal blue that seemed far more appropriate for Miami/Dade County than Queens. However, over the years this building has really blended into the local streetscape and is now considered very much a part of the community. The same might very well occur here – or not. Only time will tell.
Howard Roark October 21st, 2010 at 9:52 am
You want to improve a drab block
Well..
Why not instead of painting an optical illusion building that probably violates building codes anyway…
YOU PLANT SOME FUCKING TREES!
Case in point – cross Wycoff Ave from Bushwick into Ridgewood – you get a completely different feel, from a down and out neighborhood to a real community.
Why?
Well other than the fact that people are human beings and actually pick up their dog shit, there are TREES.
Just saying
Don’t be stupid
pamarama October 21st, 2010 at 12:27 pm
yep. that’s one ugly building.
Jo-Ena Bennett October 22nd, 2010 at 10:51 am
I passed by this building and was shocked that someone would have the audacity to put an eyesore in the middle of a neighborhood that’s struggling to make a comeback. Are there no standards in Bushwick? I feel sorry for the neighbors who have to look at this architectural cartoon everyday!
mike October 26th, 2010 at 5:55 pm
ya what middle class the low lifes in bushwick dont pay rent , stab , shoot and kill each other while collecting government checks to pay there rent and drug habits , at least the hipsters are nice , safe dont bother anyone and dont stand on a corner all day drinking bears and smoking blunts . there is hardly any middle class people in bushwick most of them are lazy low lifes that have 5 babies each to collect wellfare money get a education and a real job , hipsters are just making the area better
hippie17 October 29th, 2010 at 10:43 am
Well, first off all it LOOKS DISGUSTING AND UGLY, would definitly win a Razzie award for the ugliest building.
Secondly there a ‘Stop Work Order’ issued by the New York City Department Of Buildings for an illegal basement being converted into an apartment.
Sure run pay $2,000.00 a month for an illegal crappy apartment which you you might be kicked out any day by the City.
Abe Green: “i plan to build more buildings like this” as long as we let people like him get away with it, see City link,
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/OverviewForComplaintServlet?requestid=2&vlcompdetlkey=0001329644