Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As someone who is almost done Architecture school, I believe I have a valid comment here on those McMansions. The main issue with them, at least from my own observations, is that they are designed not around human comforts and needs, but around maximizing space and profit. They are designed to give people as much square-footage as possible for as little money as possible. These decorated boxes give people the objects they want in spaces that are just poorly designed. They take up the whole yard putting strain on drainage systems, put strain on the local utilities and roads, and typically tick of locals by taking over fields and forests they played in and inviting annoying people from the city over (not that everyone in these developments is that way)
I always find it ironic that they knock acres of forest down to build, taking out every single tree and putting saplings in their place, then name the development "Forest Glen" or something.
I always find it ironic that they knock acres of forest down to build, taking out every single tree and putting saplings in their place, then name the development "Forest Glen" or something.
Hahaha, I totally agree!
When my parents had their house built on a wooded lot in 1957, they left up so many trees that even today, the house doesn't need a/c in the summer because there are majestic oak trees sheltering the property. Now they mow down every tree when they build and put up these spindly things that the owners will never live long enough to see grow into mature trees. I don't get it.
My condo development has a "Woods" in its name, but there IS a patch of woods way down at the end of the complex. The one up the street has a "Brook" in its name, and I know someone who lives there, but I've never seen a brook. It's probably been rerouted through a drainpipe.
i lived in Bridgetown years ago, and i heard it was more poverty stricken now than in the 70s. When the government did not have housing restrictions for hired farm help small family farms kept their farms, but lost them, as government required standardized housing for farm employees.
there was always the rhumor that many of the farm help came from the App. Mountains in the south, and were less educated, making north and south Jersey having sharp contrasts.
Glass and canning houses were the big thing in the 70s.
I always find it ironic that they knock acres of forest down to build, taking out every single tree and putting saplings in their place, then name the development "Forest Glen" or something.
That is just what they do. They clear woods or farmland, build some new ugly thing on it, then name it after what was destroyed before it was there.
When my parents had their house built on a wooded lot in 1957, they left up so many trees that even today, the house doesn't need a/c in the summer because there are majestic oak trees sheltering the property. Now they mow down every tree when they build and put up these spindly things that the owners will never live long enough to see grow into mature trees. I don't get it.
My condo development has a "Woods" in its name, but there IS a patch of woods way down at the end of the complex. The one up the street has a "Brook" in its name, and I know someone who lives there, but I've never seen a brook. It's probably been rerouted through a drainpipe.
You know I never gave it much thought but you are right. It seems that up until about 20 years ago, whenever they built a new development, they kept lots of trees around it to keep it looking nice and quiet. And now with the new McMansion developments there are no trees or anything, it is like just an open field with these robot structures all around.
And on top of that, at least in my hometown, every single new neighborhood ("neighborhood" usually being a five-house cul-de-sac because the town is pretty much built out between developed land and preserved space) is now required to have a retention basin. They are really ugly and a huge waste of valuable land. Hydrological engineers need to come up with something better.
Edit: I recently read about how the Franklin Institute invented a new type of permeable (porous) pavement that could revolutionize water management and drainage systems in cities and suburbs. Basically, it is strong enough to support heavy traffic, but still allows water to seep through to the ground underneath. Here's a link: http://www.phillywatersheds.org/what.../porous-paving
We're just wait on Philly. As Philly goes so does south jersey.
i agree. unfortunately, philly is a product of PA. you know, the state that had miss america or whatever drop out because of her religious beliefs of having a transgendered contestant.
It was Miss USA, not Miss America, and what does that have to do with south Jersey development?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
