SCOUTING
FIELD NOTES

The Saddest House In New York City

07/02/2012

This is the story of a little house in Queens that broke my heart.

A few years ago, I was working on a movie that sent me to Richmond Hill, Queens, to find a beautiful, one-of-a-kind house. If you’ve never visited, Richmond Hill has a number of gorgeous turn-of-the-century Victorians…

…and in fact, chances are you’ve seen at least one or two Richmond Hill houses before in a film or TV show. Productions are always in the neighborhood for this rare look that’s tough to find:

For this particular film, we were looking for something a bit smaller, and it didn’t take long before I stumbled on this gem, built in 1905.

The exterior was gorgeous, and looked to be in pristine condition…

…and I especially loved the two upper floors, with their wonderful ornamentation and two oval windows. It turned out the house was for sale, and I quickly made an appointment for a tour.

As we were walking around the interior, I was equally impressed by the quality and personal touch in each room. It was clear that whoever used to live here cherished this house.

Out of curiosity, I asked what the house’s background was, and was told that its former owner, Nancy Cataldi, a local preservationist, had recently passed away. And suddenly, it all made sense.

Nancy was a major advocate for historical preservation in Richmond Hill, and had worked tirelessly to preserve the neighborhood she called home. She served as the president of the Richmond Hill Historical Society for nearly a decade, and is a major reason why so much beauty can still be found in Richmond Hill today. In fact, the street we were on was given the co-name “Nancy Cataldi Way” following her death.

As we were walking around looking at what remained of her possessions, I suddenly got a very sad feeling in the pit of my stomach. Nancy was gone, but her soul was all around us – in the worn floorboards, the antique furniture, the intricate wallpaper…But it was like I could feel that soul fading.

Ultimately, we didn’t film in the house due to rewrites moving the characters into a Manhattan apartment. Still, I never forgot the place, and when I was asked to find a house a few weeks ago, I immediately headed out to Richmond Hill to see if it might still be an option.

But as I drove by, something was wrong…

Maybe I didn’t have the correct address? I pulled over and double-checked my notes.

And then I realized:

I was at the right address.

Despite all her efforts and the endless amounts of preservation work she did in Richmond Hill, Nancy was never able to get her own street protected; the Landmarks Preservation Commission rejected her proposal in 2001.

According to this 2010 Daily News article, the new homeowners claim they were forced to renovate due to an invasion of carpenter ants.

You know what? Words are kind of failing me, so I’ll just let my pictures speak for themselves.

We ALL benefit from people like Nancy Cataldi long after they pass, and while it’s cute to name streets after preservationists, it’s a lot more important to carry on their legacy. Hopefully, this is a reminder of that.

Rest in peace, Nancy.

-SCOUT

Many more posts in the archives!

Share this post via…

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Dirk

07/06/2012

Every single person commenting on this article has probably gone shopping on New York’s famous 5th Avenue. Well shame on you all. You should have boycotted all those evil stores because on those very spots in the 1800s stood some of the most beautiful mansions in the United States, built by the Vanderbuilts and the Astors. Torn down to make way for commerce and retail. Shame on you all for buying Abercrombie & Fitch and Hollister on very spot nearly 150 years ago were built America’s castles. Pleaaaaaaaaase. If someone wants to buy a house that is not a protected house and rennovate it to their tastes, that is their right. If all these people complaining about it wanted to do something, they should have donated to this cause, bought the house and left it open as a museum. If the house, which had 100 years of wear and tear on it did not sell because nobody wanted to leave it exactly as it was, it would probably fall into dissrepair and be used as a crack house or abandoned eye sore. Go into Newark, NJ sometime and see if you would like to live on the street with all those decrepid yet historic houses. This article is so biased and one sided, it is almost funny if it weren’t for all the people with their fake sympathy. If you are really that sad about this open your wallets and give money and maybe all the houses that are ever built will stay still exactly as they are in the very moment they were constructed.

Reply
1. Scout
  
  07/06/2012
  
  Dirk –
  
  Exactly how is this article biased? You wrote: “If someone wants to buy a house that is not a protected house and rennovate it to their tastes, that is their right.”
  
  I FULLY, 100% agree, and never said otherwise. Let me reiterate my final paragraph:
  
  “We ALL benefit from people like Nancy Cataldi long after they pass, and while it’s cute to name streets after preservationists, it’s a lot more important to carry on their legacy. Hopefully, this is a reminder of that.”
  
  The point of my post is to remind people what can happen to unprotected historic homes. If you see these pictures and feel strongly, you can carry on Nancy’s legacy by becoming active in historic preservation. If you do not feel strongly, you can choose to ignore it and live with the changes.
  
  It’s as simple as that.
  
  Reply
2. Jade
  
  07/08/2012
  
  Wow, that just breaks my heart! But I refuse to slam them in the same manner as I’ve seen on this board. I totally disagree with what they’ve done, but I wouldn’t want to see this much hate come in MY direction. That being said…
  
  Dirk, I agree totally with your comment, “on those very spots in the 1800s stood some of the most beautiful mansions in the United States, built by the Vanderbuilts and the Astors”. It’s a crying shame our recent ancestors took the same short-sighted attitude as we clearly have today.
  
  Adam, look at the bigger picture not just about reasons YOU might save a historic building.
  
  What everybody is missing in all of this is that we, as a country, have destroyed so much of our history ALREADY. We are such a young country in comparison to Europe, for instance. So our historical buildings are not as note worthy, spectacular or as OLD as some of the rest of the world. But what if the people in those countries had done what we have done? What if they had decided the Coliseum needed to be a new football/soccer stadium? If the Leaning Tower of Pisa was torn down because it was too unstable? Just put up a new building that stands up straight! Think of all those amazing buildings in other parts of the world that would have been destroyed ages ago just because they were OLD!
  
  This house was simply beautiful and beloved by Nancy and she apparently spent a lot of time and money to restore it to it’s original glory. This house was OUR history people! Does this not MEAN anything to you folks who are seeing ‘no big deal’ here?
  
  We can’t do a damn thing about the horrible destruction that NYC felt was necessary so many years ago. I’m sure to them it was like tearing down an eyesore shed in your back yard and putting up a shiny new one. However, we CAN do something about the buildings we have left. We SHOULD be preserving the things that were built well and were MEANT to stand the test of time (at least as much as they knew how). When all we build now is crap that is meant to be replaced every couple of years or so, we should appreciate what is left from our forefathers. Or are we counting on other countries to preserve THEIR history so we can bulldoze ours?
  
  While I understand that the new homeowners had a right to do what they wanted with their new home, why didn’t they spend that $555K on a new home? Clearly they spent an enormous amount of money to ‘upgrade’ this once stately home to their version of beauty. Why didn’t they take an old eyesore somewhere else and spend all of that cash rebuilding that, or maybe something new? Why move into an area where their idea of ‘beauty’ was clearly out of place with the rest of the neighborhood? Why didn’t Nancy say something in her will about her home? meh
  
  I also understand the comments made about someone being totally restricted from making needed adjustments to their historically protected home. I don’t see why there can’t be well-built additions, such as a wheelchair ramp, made where necessary. Clearly this was not something that was a consideration for people back then. But I bet they would have if it had been an option. In an effort to maintain the historical appearance, perhaps a ramp could be tastefully integrated somehow in the rear where most people have to seem to park anyway? It seems like there should be some sort of compromise without destroying the basic history of a home. I think there are bad things occurring on both sides of this coin. 🙁
  
  I thoroughly agree that there should have been something done by the historical society to preserve this home. Perhaps they tried and these people had more money? I don’t know, but I just cannot believe that these homes are being abandoned to people who either don’t care or who don’t understand their significance.
  
  I live in Tucson, Arizona and the oldest homes here were built in the early 1900’s. There might even be some that were built in the late 1800’s. But they are NOT the magnificent, well-built, meant-to-last-a-long-frickin-time kind of buildings and homes that exist back east. My STATE isn’t as old as some of the buildings we’re talking about here! I’m disgusted at how easy it is for people to let go of their history! I’m ashamed of all the people who think ‘out with the old and in with the new’. We’d have nothing left in this world of our combined history if THEY had all felt that way. Think about THAT before you casually write off all these old homes.
  
  Reply
sivyaleah

07/06/2012

The two large eagle statues at the front walkway sum up the renovation for me.

Tacky.

Reply
Dirk

07/06/2012

And by the way … one day, people might consider it an interesting and humorous historical footnote to see the garish, tacky and ugly looking casino style houses in Queens, Staten Island and Long Island. If so, this house will be preserved for that kitche and everyone will eat their words. The way the economy is going, if we are not more careful New York and the rest of the US will be owned by China and India anyways and I am sure they will be much less interested in preserving vs. building factories full of slave labor in the NYC area. Seriously.

Reply
Tracy

07/06/2012

What an embarrassment.

Reply
Ki

07/06/2012

Wow! This house was so beautiful, it had so much character! 🙁

Reply
Matt

07/06/2012

Hey Adam and the homeowners: YOU DON’T WANT TO TAKE CARE OF AN OLD HOME DON’T BUY ONE!!! Guy to the burbs and buy a cookie cutter piece of crap house. The new owners of this house are FULL OF SHIT! The porch did not need replacement, nor did the windows or the front doors due to “carpenter ants” They wanted new doors and windows to feel that they were improving on energy efficiency. They spent a hell of a lot of money on the changes they did make when they could have easily spent that money buying storm windows, storm doors and repairing the front porch. These new owners I hope are haunted for life. I HATE people that buy a house that has been perfectly fine for 100+ years only to put their disgusting changes on it. Would we retouch the Mona Lisa if the paint were flaking or print a new declaration of independence simply because the old one was torn? Save me your bullshit stories and stop buying old houses you disgusting savages. I’m sickened by your lack of taste, RESPECT and intelligence. Please just stay in the suburbs with your crappy town houses and leave the history to those who care about it.

Reply
Tara

07/06/2012

So sad to see these kinds of things happen. This is why protecting these neighborhoods and having Historic Landmark preservation rules in place are essential if we are going to truly preserve these architectural gems. Funny how the new owners said they had no choice because of capenter ants. Is that why they changed the windows too? Ewww….Thankful for people like Nancy who made a difference and brought more awareness. I’m sad that her propsal was rejected…..

Reply
Mary Jo Gallagher

07/06/2012

This is architectural malpractice of the first degree!! Absolutely heinous!!!

Reply
Kathleen August

07/06/2012

They took elegance and made it cheesy. How sad.

Reply
jean

07/06/2012

That makes me feel ill, as someone who lives in an 1894 Victorian, in an historic district. If you are ever looking for Victorians, Tudor Revivals, Colonials (real Colonials, not Colonial Revivals) check out South Orange, NJ. Lots of beautiful historic houses, some giant mansions, and some more modest homes. And from the right angle, it could be 100 years ago. When I look out my front parlor window, it could be 100 years ago, because the surrounding houses are all built in the 19th century.

Reply
jean

07/06/2012

Oh, and we have working gas lamps lighting our streets!

Reply
Mark E Tisdale

07/06/2012

Wow, what a truly soulless home they transformed that old character-filled beauty into… Truly sad!

Reply
Kelly

07/06/2012

Cripes that’s an ugly Reno! I don’t see the point to the brick…is that even real brick? I don’t really know much about the styles of homes, but it seems they were trying to go for a craftsman look? What is the point in buying a pretty Victorian and trying to turn it into something else?

Reply
ken mac

07/06/2012

One shot of the newly renovated house seems to be exposing a rather demonic grin

Reply
Nelle

07/06/2012

This is the saddest thing I’ve ever seen. I spent some part of most childhood summers at my great-aunt and great-uncle’s house on 105th St. in Richmond Hill.

Reply
Mammy

07/06/2012

L-O-S-E-R-S!

Reply
Rick S

07/06/2012

That is one insenative gut job. They say they had carpenter ants and needed to replace all the siding and porch. Remove all the interesting detail that made the house unique, in order to install the same big box windows, doors and spindles so common everywhere.

When they replace everything on a house to be consistant it will likely cost more than replacing only the few damaged parts.

Like I have heard before “people don’t know how much it costs to look this cheap”
rick

Reply
Frannie

07/06/2012

The new owners lack of respect for historic preservation and beautiful architecture made me think of my one of my husband’s favorite sayings. “The only taste they have is in their mouth”

Reply
Carol

07/06/2012

Very sad…It must have taken a pretty penny to gut the porch, etc., and put in all that concrete, brick and fencing, not to mention taking all those trees and bushes down. Why not take that money and bring it back to it’s original glory ? Some elbow grease and diy would have taken care of the bushes and weeds. It doesn’t have to be instant gratification. Many restorations or improvements take years for some of us to accomplish.

Reply
DeeB

07/06/2012

Minus some kind of conspicuous shiny chrome, this renovation has the earmarks of Bukharan immigrants.

Bukharans hail from an arid, desert-like part of Uzbekistan, and in a seeming effort to recreate their homeland in the temperate Northeast, generally cut down trees, pave over grass and flowers, and to for a rather fortress-like ostentation.

They probably don’t like the idea of the high water bills it takes to keep up greenery over the summer.

Hopefully the Bukharans will follow the classic US immigrant pattern and eventually leave New York and head west. Their whole aesthetic would be a lot more suitable for places that resemble their homeland, like New Mexico, Texas or Arizona.

In the meantime, citizens in historic neighborhoods better wake up and enact strict zoning laws lest they be turned into concrete deserts. Thank heavens Sunnyside Gardens was landmarked as a historic district.

Reply