Results for “Buff Straub”

Yes, let’s have a discussion - about the topic of the story! :)

These neighborhoods offer incredible value for money. If you are constrained by your budget, or if you just like to get a crazy good deal, these are the neighborhoods in which to purchase a house. Imagine a gorgeous Craftsman bungalow from the 1920s surrounded by similarly lovely houses for under $200K (that translates into a miniscule $1,000 monthly payment!) Amazing.

I think the comparison to the Old Fourth Ward is apt. Before the recession, I wouldn’t have moved to O4W. Now I can’t afford it. Oops! I guess I missed that opportunity. Lesson learned.

Like the old O4W, the West End is still little dicey. There are still some Section 8 rentals, panhandlers hang out at the freeway exits, shopping-cart-pushing dudes occasionally stroll by. You no longer need bars on your windows, but you do want to keep an eye out for a stranger on your neighbor’s property or in your garage. More significantly, there is a shortage of good restaurants, bars, and cafes (restaurant entrepreneurs take notice!) But there is MARTA train station, good retail (CVS, Wells Fargo, Ace, Krispy Kreme,) and a very central location. And there is the beautiful, wonderful Beltline, which will bump everything up another notch.

If you are a history buff, check out the neighborhood website at AtlantaWestEnd[dot]org. This used to be one of the toniest neighborhoods in Atlanta, a bit like Boston’s South End.

By the way, I know Westview, too, and it is very nice as well. I don’t know Adair Park, but I hear good things. All three neighborhoods have strong associations.

Once the West End gets the full Beltline (and an excellent restaurant) its reputation will spread city-wide.

I can understand how one can knock it, if they’ve never ventured outside away from their keyboards and looked around a bit. I too wasn’t a believer… that is until I was sailing my boat over to Catalina at night about 4 years ago. I noticed what appeared to be an overly bright star directly ahead of me. I kept my eye on it out of curiousity, it was stationary and nothing too strange. Then after about 4 minutes it made a sudden jump to the left. I’m talking about instant speed, and an instant stop. That made me jump. I grabbed my binoculars from the cabin below as fast as possible. In the binoculars it still looked like a small ball of bright blue light, star-ish. After one minute it suddenly jumped back to the right very very fast, and a dead stop just where it had been before. It stay for about half a minute, then this thing literally shot straight up into space in less then a second. It was unreal. It had been at what I estimate was 10,000 feet slightly behind Catalina. I was about 5 miles away. I estimate the jumps to the left annd right where at a speed of 2000-3000 miles per hour. The final shot into space was at an incredible speed… i can’t even guess.

I have seen missile defense test launches from Vandenbeurg AFB, and I’m very familiar with what they look like. I have also worked in aerospace, and I’m a airplane buff. I can identify almost anything. What I saw over Catalina was not man made.

If your interested in finding out more, I suggest you search youtube for "History Channel USO Catalina". And no, USO is not a typo. It gave me chills seeing this program recently and realizing I’m not the only one.

LA has mixed use projects going up in locations that should be residentially zoned and yet, here, on LaCienega Blvd. there is a plan to construct a large residential project WITHOUT a commercial component. This makes no sense whatsoever. "Retail character" that is not open to the public will create an island of dead space on what should be a vibrant pedestrian oriented street/streetscape.

Just check out the large residential project recently completed on Sawtelle in WLA a block or so south of Santa Monica Blvd. (not far from the Nuart Theatre). There is retail north and south of this project and yet some uninspired developer, coupled with some out-to-lunch urban planners approved this project without a retail component. It diminishes the street and weakens the retail community rather than enhancing it.

What can be done to introduce and require some retail in this LaCienega project? Even the most buff of bodies working out in the gym will not bring life to the street. Something more interesting (than the gym and office already mentioned) and publicly oriented needs to be introduced. This is LACIENEGA Blvd…. Since when is LaCienega a residential street in this area? Keep the commercial where it belongs… Is anyone in the Planning Dept. or community watching and interested in developing a vision for the street before it is chopped up and becomes a depository for whatever each developer can do to maximize their profit! Maybe there should be a pedestrian or neighborhood oriented district adopted for the street? The conversation should take place before the project becomes a reality.

Guest #17, there has not been a SINGLE bit of "Hate" on LeFetre and what he does.

You can disagree with asking CARBON BEACH prices for the semi-Ghetto with views of a freeway and train yards w/o hating him.

No personal slams, no slams on his renno, the only "hate" has been at 1) the underlying bones (private spaces too small) and 2) the hood/setting (not his fault) and 3) the actual MARKET for that area.

And, BTW, the MARKET is never "wrong" – EVERY architecture buff and owner/buyer I know walked this house and did NOT pull the trigger. I paid the standard (at the time) 30% premium for my (big name mid-century architect name redacted) AND did a near LeFetre-level restoration. In NO universe would I ask $2,000 a foot even for my own and I’m in a "better" zip code (as defined by median price and cost per foot).

In the SAME period this house has been on the market, DOZENS of architectural houses of real worth have sold for MORE AND LESS than this house. It’s simply priced wrong.

Oh, and just a clarification, LeFetre does not continue to do this "in this market" the purchases were all pre-bubble. He just got caught holding a lot when it popped, just like lots of other guys.

This apartment is in the D Line, third best in the building after the B (corner and largest) and A (avenue facing), and it is a remnant of an original triplex maisonette.The maisonette wasnt alot bigger than the duplexes above howere, keep in mind some space was taken by the private entrance small foyer and a secondary staircase.In the triplex maisonetter on the grounf floor there was only one public room, the rest above.
As for the ceilings.All 740 Park Avenue duplexes have 12 foot ceilings on the lower floors and 10 feet on the bedroom level.Its very easy to prove/know this if you’re a prewar buff like me LOL
740 has 12 floors in the 150 fot cornice line admited on Park Avenue.That means each duplex "takes" 25 feet , but that includes 2 floors.And the floors are 1/12 feet thick as in all grand East Side buildings.That leaves 22 feet .12 on public rooms floor, 10 on bedroom floor.The ceilings might look low because the pic is taken from a few good feet off the floor,and lighting, room proportions also factor in.But they are 12 foot.
ps.I almost forgot ,15& 16 floors have 14 foot ceilings on lower fl and 11 on bedroom.There are two very large "special" duplexes there, built for Brewster/Rockefeller(the bigger one, covering A&B lines) and a smaller one built for James T lee, now owned by Lauder(covers C & D lines, and its half the size of Brewster one).

Well for one I don’t have any kind of God to lead me into fighting. But will say I might be more of a Muslim then any thing else. So don’t bring your self down when you don’t know what talking about Mr. anonymous. first if you don’t understand things ask questions or look them up on the net. The uproar in Pittsburgh was about the mural being put in the wrong place first of all and the Living Walls did not have all the paper work in order to do the mural. So they are as bad as tagger’s. The leadership needs to be looked at from City Hall way down to Living Walls and in between like the neighborhood leaders. I know for a fact Living Walls did not ask the neighborhood what they wanted and did what they wanted to do. If in fact that Living Walls did something that the neighborhood wanted it might have been unseen and nothing would have been done. It’s time that Living Walls stops doing what they have been doing and look at their leadership like Nathan Bolster. I feel that that neighborhood rights was stepped on by Living Walls and really don’t blame them for buffing the wall. So next time you guys from Living Walls do something like this please reach out to people of the neighborhood first. Don’t be like you cannot tell me what to paint or not to paint. Bad mistake you made to say this on the news. I will be the first to buff any wall you paint with that attitude. Just saying……..

This is arguably the worst new building to go up in Manhattan to date. This construction was plagued from day one. There were several issues with the ability to build on this site let alone if there are still any pending lawsuits from the crane collapse. In any event the shop on the corner went out of business I would assume to some extent due to the lack of access to the store.

In any event this is the most hideous looking development I have come across. I am in Real Estate. I advised any customers I worked with at the time this was for sale to stand clear of here. There is nothing here..About 6 inches of slab wrapped by plexiglass. There is much chatter about other buildings that lack class or any design innovation but this is the worst and I have seen them all from LIC to 16th St Parkslope. I have lived on Ave A and 13th for nearly 8 years. When I come across 9th street everyday on the M8 I look up at 3rd Ave and say holy shit that is ugly. I mean every time. I can’t place it ( I am a design buff and I know my Architectural history) but maybe hospital rooms from the 50’s? What is it? Anyone know what awful structure this reminds you of? This is toll bros too..

If it was not so damn cold out. I would sit on my beautiful pre-war roof deck with some type of lense. Maybe catch one of these morons girlfriends or wives walking around. At least then I see value. Upon resale these owners are doomed. Think 20% off asking..

About Rancheros Road (Formerly Merendino Lane)

Long time USC School of Architecture faculty member Sal Merendino and Bill Williams, with their newly formed Pasadena firm Environmental Designs, purchased an upslope section of the Linda Vista hillside with hopes of creating a modernist community. All of the properties were to be site specific and take advantage of the broad views of the City of Pasadena and the San Gabriel mountains beyond. Each lot was assigned to a member of the company or USC associate and between about 1953 and 1964 a private enclave was created. The original owners enjoyed the small community of like-minded neighbors. Later a small HOA (Upper Rancheros Road Association) was created to share the cost of maintaining the road.

While Williams and Merendino are credited with five houses on Upper Rancheros Road, other architects who designed homes in the vicinity include Buff & Hensman, Smith & Williams, Nyberg & Bissner, Vicente Bonini, Leland Evison and Ray Kappe.

Background

In 1930 as the USC School of Architecture shed virtually overnight its
Beaux-Arts-influenced curriculum and adopted a modern, pragmatic approach. The stage was set for faculty members, students, and graduating architects alike to embark on the creation of a new kind of California architecture. 1290 Rancheros is an example of the international style fueling this period of change. The original structure was a mere 1178 square feet of living area suspended above the canyon on steel posts anchored in the solid granite hillside. From the street, the simple low-slung and unassuming horizontal structure gave way to the expansive city and mountain views afforded by its promontory location.

Purchased in 2006 by its current owners, the home had been victim to the less than skillful hand of a developer. All of the original fixtures and cabinetry were removed and the original aesthetic considerations ignored. Fortunately the original steel-hooded fireplace and built-in buffet remained as inspiration for the renovation and addition.

I appreciate the thoughtful criticism, but I had a few thoughts as I was reading.

First, I’m detecting a significant contradiction in the talk about what a museum’s priorities should be. Some of this was also addressed in the long debate over the Folk Art Museum demolition/MoMA expansion. How important is big name iconic architecture, and should it trump the display of art, the functionality of the museum, and the goals of the institution? There is an enormous amount of criticism of living architects who prioritize their signature aesthetics over function and art viewing, but those same critics seem to be very tolerant of historic signature aesthetics being prioritized over function and art viewing. In this case, I am hearing critics argue that preservation of Gordon Bunshaft’s entire design should trump the quality of the art-viewing experience and the programmatic goals of the museum.

Second, the article makes it seem like the only reason for the proposed atrium is to provide a shortcut for Buff State students parking on Lincoln parkway. Obviously this isn’t true. There is an entire Olmsted park that the gallery currently has its back to (or is it the front? It depends on who you ask). Creating a unified entrance that allows the public to use without purchasing a ticket will resolve the weird staggered two-facedness of the complex, while creating a stronger connection between the institution and the city by creating a new civic space. It also obviously makes sense to be able to access the restaurant and store without purchasing a ticket to the museum. Also, above the atrium is half of the needed new gallery space. Also, it provides a large interior space for performances, parties, festivals, films which are increasingly an important function contemporary art institutions.

Also, to call the restoration of a lawn that predates the museum (and the suburbs) a "suburban-style front yard" seems like an incorrect analysis. In fact, sprawling the museum outward by creating a chain of four buildings with connecting corridors begins to feel less urban and more like a college campus or an airport. By building within the existing footprint, it creates more density and intensity versus diluting it over a larger area.

With all of that said, I do wonder if there is a way to preserve more of Bunshafts architecture, or to creatively reuse more of the elements like the plinth or the rhythm and materiality of the windows.