Modest proposal for builders: breathing room around a house.

[gloomndoom]

One of the annoying things about new housing in CA is the small lot, where the houses are practically
touching each other like some Soviet-era project. I think one opportunity for a builder to distinguish itself and attract some interest these gloomy days would be to
offer houses with some breathing space for a reasonable price. I know I would be interested.

And this should be for even a modest-sized house.
(Another thread about Harveston in Temecula mentioned this, and it reflected what I look for while browsing.) I don’t even know why zoning laws allow this kind of unsightly crowding, especially in outlying areas where land is cheap.

[sdduuuude]

Here here !

[sdduuuude]

Here here !

[sdduuuude]

Here here !

[sdduuuude]

Here here !

[sdduuuude]

Here here !

[Bugs]

They allow the density because that’s where the money is. The land and entitlements for residential development are what cost all the money.

1 Acre / 7 units will equal 5,000 SqFt lots (streets and open space easements will detract from finished lot sizes)

1 Acre / 4 units will equal 9,000 SqFt lots

People don’t really start feeling less cramped until you get to about 2 units/acre (20,000 SqFt lots).

With the higher (7/acre) density the developer cuts his land costs by more than half (compared to the 4/acre) because he’s dividing up the infrastructure by more units.

Bigger lots = more suburban sprawl, not to mention the increased use of resources.

The conservationists want us to build up, not out. They want high density cities with efficient mass transit and short commuting distances for work. This would leave the outlying areas to “breathe”, free of human contamination.

Residential subdivisions are more of an eyesore to a conservationist than a nuclear power plant.

[Bugs]

They allow the density because that’s where the money is. The land and entitlements for residential development are what cost all the money.

1 Acre / 7 units will equal 5,000 SqFt lots (streets and open space easements will detract from finished lot sizes)

1 Acre / 4 units will equal 9,000 SqFt lots

People don’t really start feeling less cramped until you get to about 2 units/acre (20,000 SqFt lots).

With the higher (7/acre) density the developer cuts his land costs by more than half (compared to the 4/acre) because he’s dividing up the infrastructure by more units.

Bigger lots = more suburban sprawl, not to mention the increased use of resources.

The conservationists want us to build up, not out. They want high density cities with efficient mass transit and short commuting distances for work. This would leave the outlying areas to “breathe”, free of human contamination.

Residential subdivisions are more of an eyesore to a conservationist than a nuclear power plant.

[Bugs]

They allow the density because that’s where the money is. The land and entitlements for residential development are what cost all the money.

1 Acre / 7 units will equal 5,000 SqFt lots (streets and open space easements will detract from finished lot sizes)

1 Acre / 4 units will equal 9,000 SqFt lots

People don’t really start feeling less cramped until you get to about 2 units/acre (20,000 SqFt lots).

With the higher (7/acre) density the developer cuts his land costs by more than half (compared to the 4/acre) because he’s dividing up the infrastructure by more units.

Bigger lots = more suburban sprawl, not to mention the increased use of resources.

The conservationists want us to build up, not out. They want high density cities with efficient mass transit and short commuting distances for work. This would leave the outlying areas to “breathe”, free of human contamination.

Residential subdivisions are more of an eyesore to a conservationist than a nuclear power plant.

[Bugs]

They allow the density because that’s where the money is. The land and entitlements for residential development are what cost all the money.

1 Acre / 7 units will equal 5,000 SqFt lots (streets and open space easements will detract from finished lot sizes)

1 Acre / 4 units will equal 9,000 SqFt lots

People don’t really start feeling less cramped until you get to about 2 units/acre (20,000 SqFt lots).

With the higher (7/acre) density the developer cuts his land costs by more than half (compared to the 4/acre) because he’s dividing up the infrastructure by more units.

Bigger lots = more suburban sprawl, not to mention the increased use of resources.

The conservationists want us to build up, not out. They want high density cities with efficient mass transit and short commuting distances for work. This would leave the outlying areas to “breathe”, free of human contamination.

Residential subdivisions are more of an eyesore to a conservationist than a nuclear power plant.

[Bugs]

They allow the density because that’s where the money is. The land and entitlements for residential development are what cost all the money.

1 Acre / 7 units will equal 5,000 SqFt lots (streets and open space easements will detract from finished lot sizes)

1 Acre / 4 units will equal 9,000 SqFt lots

People don’t really start feeling less cramped until you get to about 2 units/acre (20,000 SqFt lots).

With the higher (7/acre) density the developer cuts his land costs by more than half (compared to the 4/acre) because he’s dividing up the infrastructure by more units.

Bigger lots = more suburban sprawl, not to mention the increased use of resources.

The conservationists want us to build up, not out. They want high density cities with efficient mass transit and short commuting distances for work. This would leave the outlying areas to “breathe”, free of human contamination.

Residential subdivisions are more of an eyesore to a conservationist than a nuclear power plant.

[Author]

Posts