I arrived in Queens, New York yesterday and am spending the week here. Immediately upon viewing the neighborhood, which I have not seen for more than a year, I was struck by a bizarre phenomenon that has apparently taken hold here. Bukharians - Jewish immigrants from the now-nonexistent country of Bukharia - have settled in Queens. Unlike most immigrants, these people are apparently very wealthy, and have started building enormous houses all over Queens. The houses, which seem to be all built by the same contractor out of the same materials and pattern, are generally three stories high with many balconies and windows, built of a light sandstone-colored bricks and surrounded by an extremely shiny metal gate. They have no lawns to speak of, and are, in my opinion, rather desolate looking, despite their obviously high price.
(The picture in that story shows a house significantly more upscale than the ones I have seen, which are in the area around 164th Street.)
They clash with the surrounding houses. There are a lot of really nice old fashioned half-timbered, gambrel roof and Dutch style homes around here and the Bukharian buildings look totally out of place.
I think they should have some kind of rule that the new houses built in the area should be required to roughly match the existing ones.
I guess we could round them up and place em in camps…
I’m not entirely happy with some Jewish peoples refusal to mix in with American culture. Google “Kiryas Joel” if you’re curious.
But… what’s the damage here?
If they are tearing down historic buildings then they can be stopped by some sort of law preserving historic buildings.
Are they hurting the surrounding property values by building these “ugly” houses? I don’t think there is a lot that can be done. Change the zoning laws?
It’s going to be hard to determine if people have actually been damaged by the construction of these houses or if they just don’t like them because they are Jews.
Since when are Buildings in New York supposed to match? Walk down any Manhattan street and you’ll see Beaux Art alongside Art Deco alongside Modernist alongside Po-Mo. Why should this be any different? It’s a city, not a theme park.
I don’t think anyone would be upset if these folks were just moving into existing houses. Queens is very multicultural. Trying to spin this as a clash of cultures, I think, is missing the point; the real issue seems to be just an aesthetic one. The people who have lived here for more than a half century, like my grandparents, are very attached to the look of the neighborhood.
The “now-nonexistent country of Bukharia” includes the very much alive city (and province) of Bukhara, Uzbekistan. The subgroup you’re talking about has a looooong history in the region and a unique culture. Check out the restaurants - they won’t be open today (they are strict Kosher), but the food is fabulous. If you don’t speak Russian, you may be ordering on the point-and-pray method, though.
The neighborhood you’re talking about is also where my father lives, and I’ve seen the houses you’re talking about. Did you ever think that the reason they are so huge in comparison to the surrounding houses is that they might be home to multigenerational families, something that the surrounding houses just aren’t designed to do? The houses that were there weren’t anything special, mostly nondescript little bungalow-type things.
Dad isn’t crazy about the new houses either, but hey, the zoning laws allow them, and the families have simply used the property to suit their needs. The other local residents are free to work on getting the zoning laws changed. (And yes, the neighborhood is quite Jewish, though mostly not Orthodox - it isn’t strictly antisemitism that’s going on here. It’s culture clash, but not that kind.)
There’s a difference between matching and being consistent with. Different architectural styles does not (have to) mean different kinds of buildings.
No, buildings should generally not be required to match their neighbors. But (in cities and towns) they should be essentially consistent, in terms of heights and setbacks and so forth, with no more than one “step” of difference between any two neighbors on a block. Wild inconsistencies disrupt the streetscape and make it less comfortable for everyone.
This is best accomplished not with blind proscriptive zoning (you’re not allowed to build X here at all, but if Y is allowed, do whatever the hell you want) but with adaptive prescriptive building codes (to build either X or Y here, here are the ways to integrate it with the existing neighborhood).
These houses are unusually ugly–vulgar and tasteless and forbidding and showy. I hate em. I park my car in this neighborhood all the time, and I always remark to myself what a horror they are.
I suppose they’re no different than any other McMansiony-type house. The difference is that most McMansions are suburban monstrosities, while these are urban. I can see the perspective of the neighbors. It’s not that they are ugly (the picture in the OP and the one linked above aren’t ugly, IMHO…but those are the only two examples I can find on the internet). It’s just that they are a bit jarring if all the other houses on the block are two-story, Archie-Bunker type row houses.
I don’t know that there’s anything that can be “done.” Unless there’s an HOA, the neighbors have no right to dictate anything. I suppose it would be nice if new-comers would blend in like good little immigrants, but one downside of buying a house is that you don’t get to pick your neighbors. If you hate it so much, move.
One thing that I don’t like is the paved yard. Cities really don’t need any more impervious surfaces, and it seems like if you can afford a huge-ass house, you can afford a neighbor kid to mow your yard. Sometimes a paved yard is attractive, but nines out of ten, it is not. When I was down in Miami, a lot of the homes down there also have paved yards. When it’s just two or three houses on a block, it’s not so bad. But when it’s all of them, you feel like singing, “Where Have all the Flowers Gone?”
I kinda like it. I really like the heterogeneity of housing in American towns and cities. By comparison, in my locality, we’ve nearly entirely cookie-cutter style suburbs. If they’re not doing anything that contravenes the zoning requirements etc. then their neighbours either have to put up and shut up, or work to get the zoning requirements changed.
You realize that Forest Hills is a pretty Jewish neighborhood right?
If they really have money and they want to build a community then a better place for these large houses would be in west bergen county where you can still get acres upon acres.
“They” are the city council. If “they” want to stifle real estate sales and discourage people who are wealthy and want to build mansions with high tax ratables, they can vote to do so. They are welcome to vote publicly to change the zoning laws and restrict the style of home that residents are allowed to have.
This is the problem. In New York you really can’t get attached to stuff becausethingschangehereallthetime. If I had a dime for every person I’ve heard complain about how cleaning up Times Square destroyed the “real” New York I’d never have to work again, yet these people are complaining about getting rid of hookers, pimps, used needles, peep shows, and other unsavory things that chased away tourists and made it unsafe to bring your kids downtown. My neighborhood used to be a kind of seedy place but they just built a new branch of a university a block away from me and at least 4 new buildings have gone up with half a million dollar condos for sale between my apartment and the train. In 5 years I probably won’t be able to throw a stick without hitting a Starbucks or a Tasti-d-lite. Neighborhoods change all the time, sometimes for better and sometimes for worse, and that is just the way it is here. When I visit the town I grew up in to see my parents pretty much everything is the same except they’ve put in a Panda Wok where the Red Line Burger used to be. New York isn’t like that at all.
I actually live in a neighborhood with many of these houses. Let me say a)I’m Jewish and b)These houses are distinctive and they are hideous beyond all reckoning.
If I see a clear violation of New York Law (ie, paved over lawn – totally illegal for new construction – or curb cuts where they shouldn’t be) I will call in the violation to 311. Other than that, I just shake my head, mock them roundly, and try to be grateful the structures aren’t neglected and disintegrating.
Personally I think the faux half-timbers are just as ridiculous if not more so, and hardly an agrument that some sort of decorative planning scheme should be put in place.
Argent, I live in Kew Gardens Hills where many Bukharians have been doing such construction. One of my next door neighbors is one such.
What to do about it? Nothing. Let all of us build, modify and personalize our houses to the extent we’re able to afford (within safety and environmental regulations, of course). Anyone complaining about issues like style are just a bunch of jealous sour grapers.
The real estate costs enough, thank you very much. We don’t want busybodies legislating that what we want to do with the property we paid a bundle for has to conform to their particular sense of taste.
BTW, for anyone who interested in monitoring their neighborhood’s green spaces, here is the NYC zoning rule for lawns (applies to all new construction): if frontage is 20ft or less, 25% of the front lawn must be something that grows in the ground. grass, ground cover, trees, and shrubs are all acceptable. As the width of the lot gets larger, a greater percentage of the front lawn must be some kind of plant matter, up to 50% when the frontage is 60ft or greater.
