No End in Gravesend
  Clockwise from top left   459 Avenue S $5 million   2,500 s.f. house sitting vacant   450 Avenue S $11 million   teardown plus lot   replaced with 10,400 s.f. house   469 Avenue S $2.5 million   teardown, new 8,700 s.f. house We knew there was some crazy $#!% going on out…
  Clockwise from top left
  459 Avenue S $5 million
  2,500 s.f. house sitting vacant
  450 Avenue S $11 million
  teardown plus lot
  replaced with 10,400 s.f. house
  469 Avenue S $2.5 million
  teardown, new 8,700 s.f. house
We knew there was some crazy $#!% going on out in Gravesend but, man, this is something else. In the end, it’s just a microcosm, albeit an exaggerated one, of the forces of supply and demand that have driven up prices of real estate across New York City over the past decade. With a limited number of lots and a rising prosperity among the largely Syrian Jewish community, Gravesend has seen per square foot prices approach what only the best Manhattan nabes could command. “This market is not dictated by interest rates or the price of real estate as a whole,” said Frank Lupi, the president of Wolf Properties, a real estate agency in Gravesend. “The houses over here, they sell very quickly, and you’re almost naming your price at this point.” While the aesthetic wouldn’t fly in most of brownstone Brooklyn, we’ re unaware of any local movements promoting a down-zoning of the area. Not being familiar with the area, we’re curious as to whether there are any pockets of older architecture that are threatened by the McMansion trend sweeping the area. Or is it just unremarkable houses from the last thirty or forty years being torn down and replaced with larger monstrosities?
Paying Any Price to Live Here [NY Times] GMAP
Look, I think if the community wants large houses on small lots, I don’t really see the problem with it. What if they decided to build apartment buildings at the pace in the south slope or clinton hill or ft. greene. They don’t exactly fit in with surrounding brownstone brooklyn. I think the mediterenean style looks great and alot better than what was there before and there is alot of symetry to each other both in style of the houses and proportion. I agree with the other poster that this is an urban environment and there is much more diversity that exists in other nabes in the borough. NYC’s landscape has been changing incessantly.
Shahn Andersen
Um No! Brownstones were all built to that scale and MEANT to be a continuous row of houses. The Brownstones don’t look out of scale, because they are the same scale.
The McMansions are plopped down on lots that were originally zoned smaller scale buildings and MEANT to have some yard or space between the houses. Totally different scenario.
I think that’s not quite right. Obviously, a shack is big construction on a meadow, but midtown Manhattan didn’t develop from woods to skyscrapers in one fell swoop. Development happens bit by bit, and the history of NYC is people speaking up when the development gets out of proportion–we have zoning and setbacks because of the Equitable Building in 1913, I believe. Brownstones were not built out of proportion but in proportion to one another. Scale actually mattered quite a bit in the past. Some houses out in Brooklyn were built on larger lots that were “filled in”–as is happening on Staten Island–but communities like Gravesend also witnessed a lot of similar houses going up on green fields at about the same time by the same developer, with lots that allowed for space and air around the houses. This was a respite from and response to the intense human congestion in the city in the early 20th century. I agree with the earlier poster that it is odd and out of proportion to build these huge houses on small lots–many smaller than you can find in Clinto Hill, for instance. You have a two- or three-story window looking out on….your neighbor’s two- or three-story window. And the people in the bungalow next door no longer have enough space to comfortably take their garbage cans up and down the side yard, reduced privacy and reduced light. Just because something Can be built doesn’t mean it Should be built.
Anon 6:18, by your definition of a McMansion, every brownstone built 100 years ago would have qualified as one. Are the brownstones most of us love so much “woefully out of scale on their lots”?
We live in a city where the average lot size is 20×100, which doesn’t leave much space for both a house and open space. Many houses in the five boroughs happen to have been built on two acres, those two acres were just cut up into multiple lots later on.
I find it terribly ironic that when urban sprawl starts turning rural areas suburban, and suburban areas urban, that people such as yourself begin to lament how “out of scale” these new developments are. How out of scale was new development in Midtown Manhattan two hundred years ago when it was a rural country enclave?
McMansion are new buildings that are build to the very edge of what ever the local zoning will allow. Push the boundaries of how big a house can be on a lot and how tall it can be.
Granted, some of the houses may be a high quality construction; but they look woefully out of scale on their lots. The floor plans of these houses look like they should be sitting on a minimum of 2 acres of land, not squished all on top of each other.
I have to disagree with anon comments re: quality of construction. From Midwood out to Sheepsehead Bay and along the flanks of thoat corridor there are huge problems for Con Ed and Fire Department because things are being built with improper permits and out of code. There are lots of small fires and G-d forbid there from being a worse tragedy because people are not paying attention and creating dangerous situations. The aesthetic issue is that individual neighborhoods are losing their character, in this area that means open space, low-rise and lots of lot space around and between houses. Safety-wise, it’s very serious and scandalous that building codes are ignored.
you have to drive by the area to appreciate the beauty of the homes. I’ve had the opportunity to enter a few, and let me tell you they are breath taking. Not your ordinary run-of-the mill construction. Lots of money out there. they all have servants of the latina influence wearing light blue aprons. Check it out.
Do you mean me? The first poster who mention the arts and crafts bungalow? I didn’t link to any google maps, so I’m confused. Are you saying that house is gone? I think it did have a red roof and certainly a large front lawn….
Anon at 12.49, I think what people are missing is that McMansion doesn’t mean someone (e.g. Brownstoner) thinks the house is poorly constructed or does not use high end finishes etc. It is more of an aesthetic critique usually denoting an enormous, often ostentatious, looking house (be it in Brooklyn, Greenwich or Santa Barabara).