Shop Products
Houzz Logo Print
mikend_gw

awesome house for sale in Rochester, NY ...

mikend
14 years ago

definitely outside my budget (especially with the exorbitant taxes here), but I figured people would want to check it out.

http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/16-East-Blvd_Rochester_NY_14610_1113348118

Comments (12)

  • worthy
    14 years ago

    Nice!

    Frank Lloyd Wright

    But I sometimes wonder if I posted a Wright home as a candidate for reno, how many suggestions for "improvement" it would attract before some of the usual suspects here caught on and spoiled the fun.

  • cosmikcat
    14 years ago

    You really got to watch yourself with those old Frank Lloyd Wright homes. We've got a lot of them here in Chicago and they're all kinds of "rules" involved if they have historic designation. They even go so far as to tell you what kind of art you can hang on the walls! I kid you not. Frank Lloyd Wright groupies are intense.
    They're really pretty but are known for having lots of problems. Apparently he would use building materials somewhat experimentally and the houses sometimes suffer for it. I'll just enjoy them from afar...

  • kudzu9
    14 years ago

    Actually, for my area (Seattle), you'd have a hard time finding a regular house of that size for the listing price. I'm amazed at how "cheap" it is. I'm not ready to move to Rochester...but I thought about it for a few seconds!

  • johnmari
    14 years ago

    "They're really pretty but are known for having lots of problems. Apparently he would use building materials somewhat experimentally and the houses sometimes suffer for it."

    Which is why I've nicknamed him "Frank Lloyd Wrong" for ages. He may have drawn dang good pictures of houses but he was also a prima donna with little concept of livability and engineering. How many millions of dollars has it taken to keep Fallingwater from, well, falling into the water - it's been collapsing since BEFORE it was finished, and although it was occupied part-time (on weekends) for a few decades, it was never actually completely safely inhabitable from an engineering standpoint! It's a sculpture, not a house.

    The Rochester house seems somewhat more livable, although I can't have been the only one who looked at the picture of the "Zen rock garden" and thought "neighborhood litterbox"? I wonder if it is being sold furnished?

  • mikend
    Original Author
    14 years ago

    The price is definitely reasonable given that you are buying a piece of history. In general, Rochester home values are pretty reasonable- though taxes are outrageous (about 3% of the assessed value).

    There was an article about this house in the local paper. The dining room furniture is owned by the Landmark Society who rents it to the owners.

  • mikend
    Original Author
    13 years ago

    A follow-up on this house. The new owners have quite a project on their hands (and quite a bankroll).

    http://www.rochestercitynewspaper.com/news/articles/2010/09/Preserving-a-Rochester-treasure/

    Here is a link that might be useful: Boynton House

  • worthy
    13 years ago

    Thanks for the followup.

    The failures in the house seem to be those of poor maintenance and idiotic "improvements" not the original design. Whittling down a main support beam from 12x8 to 2x8!

  • gwbr54
    13 years ago

    While a number of FLW buildings have had maintenance issues, you have to give the man credit for his design of Tokyo's Imperial Hotel, which was one of the few buildings to survive a major earthquake in the 1920's.

  • columbusguy1
    13 years ago

    Personally, I will reserve judgment on Wright's quality as a designer since I hate Prairie School architecture--it may use natural materials cleverly which I should like from an aesthetic viewpoint, but I find all his designs cold and forbidding.
    I also hate Bauhaus and anything else designed with a 'modern' flavor. Craftsman bungalows are as modern as I care to get in architecture.
    Modern design is an effort to appeal to the masses more efficiently, thus, no need for things like details, quality or artistry. We are taught that minimalist is best--but that is only true because there isn't sufficient material to go around with the increase in our numbers these days; in earlier years, less population meant more materials could be used by designers.

  • ideagirl2
    13 years ago

    **Which is why I've nicknamed him "Frank Lloyd Wrong" for ages. He may have drawn dang good pictures of houses but he was also a prima donna with little concept of livability and engineering. How many millions of dollars has it taken to keep Fallingwater from, well, falling into the water - it's been collapsing since BEFORE it was finished, and although it was occupied part-time (on weekends) for a few decades, it was never actually completely safely inhabitable from an engineering standpoint! It's a sculpture, not a house.**

    Oh, Johnmari, you are so right. I high-five you from afar for posting that. It's good to know I'm not alone in questioning the way people seem to WORSHIP him.

  • kindred_ny
    13 years ago

    Oh, how I LOVE Craftsman style... (sigh)

  • mikend
    Original Author
    12 years ago

    yet another historic one-of-a-kind house for sale in Rochester (quite different than the Frank Lloyd Wright house).

    http://nothnagle.com/Properties/Details.aspx?MLS=19&M=R159665

    http://jhjarchitecture.com/MushroomHouse/pictures.html