Sunday, February 18, 2007

Commercial Crap, part 1

The Crapper hasn't really posted much about commercial buildings which uglify our urban landscape, so here's a good one to start off with. 79-06 & 79-10 Metropolitan Avenue, Middle Village. Since it's cold outside, get a cup of hot cocoa and enjoy reading about the violations the owner and/or contractor was allowed to get way with on this one. Not to mention that people with taste like this should be locked up with the key tossed into a bottomless pit.

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are a real hateful and angry person. This building is not that bad.

I guess you can't be happy unless your spewing your venom on something.

Most of your Queens Crap postings are right on. Lately, though, you have been over-critical.

Queens Crapper said...

Well the previous poster makes some interesting points. He/she believes I am a hateful and angry person which is totally irrelevant to whether or not this is an ugly building. He/she guesses that I can't be happy unless I am "spewing my venom on something" yet says most of my posts are "right on," which makes no sense whatsoever. He/she also doesn't realize that when you wish to say "you are," use of the contraction you're is called for and not the singular nominative pronoun your. "Not that bad" is a relative term. Perhaps compared to a lot of the other crap featured here, this building seems mild, however it is completely out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. I suppose the 10 ECB violations racked up here during construction are also part of what make it "not that bad."

Anonymous said...

Ouch. Somebody doesn't take criticism well. I think you'll need to grow a thicker skin if you're going to be criticizing dozens of buildings a week and still allow people to post on your blog.

Granted, you get the final say, since you get to approve submissions, but if you're going to continue to nitpick posters' spelling or grammar, you'll be alienating many of this site's fans.

You might want to reconsider that last response to that posting.

I agree with the first poster. While that same style of (ahem) architecture would fit in very well with some parts of Queens, with the massive rails and "old world" look, it's not that different from some of the older buildings you see throughout different parts of Queens. Try picturing that very same facade in ten years, with the car exhaust-induced grime on it. Without that ugly "new" factor in there, I have to say, and yes, I'm going to quote the original poster, "it's not that bad."

I really wish it had been set back just a little bit, though.

Anonymous said...

While this IS a really ugly building the building diagonally across Metropolitan Avenue from it is somewhat worse. The Crifasi Real Estate Building really sucks.

Anonymous said...

I think you'll need to grow a thicker skin if you're going to be criticizing dozens of buildings a week and still allow people to post on your blog.

You're kidding right? (Note the proper use of the contraction.) The Crapper doesn't need to grow a thick skin because of his criticism of the real estate industry. No, wait until the slings and arrows come from the politicians trying to shut this site down, because you know word has gotten back to them.

There's nothing wrong with correcting grammar, spelling or punctuation. That's how people learn. No, the real crime would be to allow it to happen, like our friends in the city council are allowing our borough to be destroyed by developers.

Diamond Jim said...

Are you sure that's not a fake storefront for a Sopranos shoot?

Anonymous said...

Funny how people are comparing this building to buildings in other parts of Queens and saying that it's not that bad. Well, do you have something like this built next door to you? Would you like to? Hey, it's not that bad compared to sites in other parts of Queens, so you should have all the enjoyment of looking at it every day as the people along Metropolitan Avenue do!

Anonymous said...

OH MY GOD that thing is hideous! There are still a few old-style frame homes along this stretch of road. I hope this didn't replace them.

The Observer said...

Just to point out the obvious: Just up the block a little is the developers' best friend: Defecate Gallagher.

So, there may well be an explanation for the 10 violations racked up during construction.

verdi said...

As an Italian American I am embarrased with this tasteless construction. It is an ignorant attempt by a peasant/builder (probably just off the boat) at juggling classical Italian Rennaisance motifs and coming up with this in- your-face ostentation.

Maybe a tripple performance of the balcony scene from Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet" (played simultaneously on each level) could be a regular feature attraction. The ballustrade would also be great for drying laundry. Gag! Let me grab a quick Brioschi!

Tony C said...

I like this building.
I like the products it sells.
I don't believe that it is hurting the neighborhood.

The building does not fit in? Diversity makes a beautiful mosaic (within reason).
My opinion, I owe it.
Queens Crapper -> switch to decaf!
You can't be on the money all the time. You have a great blog; you are definitely part of the solution. Pick your (you're - Ur - yoor - (anyone ya like) battles wisely.
Thanks,
Tony C
Feel free to correct any grammatical errors. If I receive a good score, I will print and hang on my Mom's fridge!

Queens Crapper said...

Tony C:

I like this building. (OK)
I like the products it sells. (irrelevant)
I don't believe that it is hurting the neighborhood. (OK)
The building does not fit in? Diversity makes a beautiful mosaic (within reason). (OK)
My opinion, I owe it. (I think you mean you own it. No one owes their opinion to anyone except paid consultants.)
Queens Crapper -> switch to decaf! (I don't drink coffee)

I give you an 85.

Anonymous said...

hey queens crapper, you hit a little close to home here...
you know there is a push for this type of architecture in this area. you know certain ethnic groups love this type of gaudiness just as other enjoy steel adornments. it's too bad they all feel it necessary to add their "variety" to the crap pile, but it's no surprise considering that this city no longer acts as a melting pot but more like a chunky campbell's soup!

Anonymous said...

My, my, how rabidly some people are defending this display of poor taste! Perhaps we really do get the architecture we deserve, as the NY Times said in the 1960's!

Anonymous said...

What's with the busts and lion's heads? Good lord am I at a place that sells headstones or at the theater?

Anonymous said...

Hey Crapper, people in Queens don't like it when you correct their grammar. They'd prefer that you pretend that what they say is right so as not to "dis" them. Don't correct them and let the world see what the NYC Public School system has produced.

By the way, that is a butt ugly building but the names of the businesses certainly fit in well with the motif.

Fred said...

As the old commercial said, "Now that's Italian!"

Russ H said...

Everyone defending this gem should note that within it's tiny confines are 8 apartments plus the 2 stores. It's exterior gaudiness certainly masks it's cramped living space inside extremely well.

I do, however, agree that the Crifasi real estate office across the street is even uglier. I especially love the way they "disguised" the wiring to all the cell phone receivers on the roof.

Russ

verdi said...

Hey "Goombah" Tony ......get back on the set. The "Sopranos" just started filming again. Yourrah gonna missa ya curtain call

george the atheist said...

Marona Mia!...Watsa matta wida yousa guys?...She's a nicea building..Bella faccia!..She'sa komma wida diploma! (he'sa da guy who fixa da pipe!)

Tony C said...

Q C - touché!

I'll take the 85 !

Mr. Green,

A picture for you...

:)

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e192/gfya/Tony.jpg

hopper said...

This is a true piece of Queens Crap. Is it the worst thing we've seen? Probably not, but the columns and Venetian lamps and busts (oh my!!!) are beyond tasteless.

And lets not forget - this forum is about overdevelopment even more than it is about appalling lack of taste. It looks like they've crammed up to 8 residential units and two stores into this piece of faux-venetian shit. What did this building replace? Probably 2 stores + 2 apartments- anybody know?

Anonymous said...

"Wadda "PALAZZO STU CAZZO" as my Sicilian godfather would say!

verdi said...

I love it! 23 comments so far! Buono! Seems to be a hot topic! Are we going for a record on "Queens Crap"?

george the atheist said...

Il stronzo di tutti stronzi!

george the atheist said...

Let's ask the Queens Chamber of Commerce to present it its Distinguished Architecture Award.

Anonymous said...

I love this blog, but I'd love to see photos of the surrroundings so we can see the contrasts. I am not familiar with Middle Village, so it will be helpful. Is that possible?

Queens Crapper said...

Photos of Middle Village, Queens

verdi said...

George, you hit it right on the nose with your "stronzo", comment! Bellisimo!

Anonymous said...

Stronzo – I love it -- but you guys are harsh . . . c'mon it's Middle Village not some swanky street in someplace like Forest Hills . . . really, what do ya expect?

Although I don’t care for the type of balustrades used, or the busts which may be beyond the taste of some but frankly are purely decorative and could be easily be changed or removed, let’s give credit where credit is due:

1) Though the shape and style of the building is minimal and projects a no-nonsense approach, the proportions of the building are good, it’s symmetrical, the colour of the bricks is fine and looks to be solidly constructed. Is it so out of scale for a commercial street?

2) The archway entrance is a nice touch and provides shelter from the elements – as opposed to cheap awnings that you see on many other buildings.

3) For once, generous-sized terraces, recessed for privacy from neighbors and the street, that many actually entice residents to use them for more than storage of rusted bicycles and hanging laundry. Extra eyes on the street can only be counted as a good thing.

4) The red awnings add flair.

5) The front of the building looks neat and well-kept. The sidewalks appear to be swept. At least the owner/business takes care, and . . .

6) The trash is piled neatly at the curb. Not thrown in a corner as it is at the crime against humanity horror next door

-- STOP THE STUCCO-MADNESS is all I can say. The aluminium-siding sourge of today's generation.

Anonymous said...

It doesn't fit in with the surroundings. It's big and probably cramped. However showing a picture of a 2 family home as indicative of the surroundings is deceptive. Sure down the side streets you'll find homes like the ones pictured but along Metropolitan avenue you'll find a hodge-podge of styles.

Is this any worse than the brick faced fully attached bland store front with apts. over that you see all along this avenue? Besides the huge Crifasi building you have CVS & Commerce Bank adding to the bland block. You also have a row of stores with parking in front that looks like crap..set back from the street or not. Keep in mind that except for rare exception most storefronts in Queens along busy avenues and streets are not set back. Funny I can't recall what was in that spot before (I think it was an old knitting mill that sat empty for a while) but unless it was a house why protest?

Anonymous said...

I love the attitude of the previous poster.

"Metropolitan Avenue is already full of crappy buildings, so let's not make a big deal about this one."

Yes, let's cram 8 families and 2 stores into a lot that was made to hold maybe 2 families and 1 store.

CVS and Commerce don't put strains on the already delicate infrastructure the way that 10 units do.

verdi said...

Hey, Tony C. you ain't Italian for sure. Any chitrool would know that Verdi means truth (as in the Latin Veritas)! If you want Mr. Green try Signore Verde!