Comments | murva: Houses Are Disposable

murva

Houses Are Disposable

Jul 15, 2005 15:48

Sad story on one of the effects of the housing boom last night on Market Place. Apparently many old houses in some of rapidly growing cities such as Denver, are being torn down. Not because they are in bad shape, but because a 1920s brick bungalow of 900sqf is "worth less" than the lot and it's development potential for a 3 story 3,000sqf house ( Read more... )

Comments 7

buzzcock July 15 2005, 22:41:54 UTC

Their neighbor's house has already been replaced by a family destroying monstrosity.

murva July 18 2005, 19:05:24 UTC

yup, Terri gave me a tour of the destruction a couple of years ago when my Mom and I were in town. Sickening

doctorellisdee July 15 2005, 23:15:12 UTC

not to mention that the majority of modern houses are shabby, toxic pieces of total crap that require continual maintenence and won't last more than twenty years...

murva July 18 2005, 19:10:09 UTC

It will be interesting to see how long they do last. My wager is that the structeral intregity of the buildings being put up today will have to be torn down due to structeral problems in half a century.

satarnion July 16 2005, 02:06:53 UTC

I wrote a letter to my entire neighborhood before I left for Liverpool regarding this process. The developer has written several implicitly guilty-feeling responses to my letter, continuously saying (and I paraphrase), "This is what the people want! What can I do as a developer?"

My answer will be: Reconsider what you do with your life.

murva July 18 2005, 19:07:34 UTC

Has there been any attempt on the part of some residents (who are resisting this trend) and/or the neighborhood to establish development or historical preservation guidelines?

satarnion July 18 2005, 19:55:53 UTC

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA!!!!

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

no.

seriously, though, I think there's been a few attempts to limit building, but only as a means to preserve views.