- This topic has 130 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 7 months ago by (former)FormerSanDiegan.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 14, 2008 at 10:25 AM #186821April 14, 2008 at 11:06 AM #186784DCRogersParticipant
Any view likely comes with the downside that the canyon down to the 15 will act as a white noise funnel, giving a constant ambient background of poorly-tuned trucks downshifting to climb the steep grade or “Jake Braking” (noisily using the engine rather than the brakes to slow) on the northwards run.
Other examples of the view/noise tradeoff are the spectacular Mission Valley view homes on the north side of the mesa, where you have to raise your voice to talk over the roar of the expressways. Yuck.
(Oh, and don’t be fooled by the lot sizes around here… the property lines were typically drawn to a line at the bottom of the nearest canyon, but most of the land is steep and unusable.)
April 14, 2008 at 11:06 AM #186807DCRogersParticipantAny view likely comes with the downside that the canyon down to the 15 will act as a white noise funnel, giving a constant ambient background of poorly-tuned trucks downshifting to climb the steep grade or “Jake Braking” (noisily using the engine rather than the brakes to slow) on the northwards run.
Other examples of the view/noise tradeoff are the spectacular Mission Valley view homes on the north side of the mesa, where you have to raise your voice to talk over the roar of the expressways. Yuck.
(Oh, and don’t be fooled by the lot sizes around here… the property lines were typically drawn to a line at the bottom of the nearest canyon, but most of the land is steep and unusable.)
April 14, 2008 at 11:06 AM #186837DCRogersParticipantAny view likely comes with the downside that the canyon down to the 15 will act as a white noise funnel, giving a constant ambient background of poorly-tuned trucks downshifting to climb the steep grade or “Jake Braking” (noisily using the engine rather than the brakes to slow) on the northwards run.
Other examples of the view/noise tradeoff are the spectacular Mission Valley view homes on the north side of the mesa, where you have to raise your voice to talk over the roar of the expressways. Yuck.
(Oh, and don’t be fooled by the lot sizes around here… the property lines were typically drawn to a line at the bottom of the nearest canyon, but most of the land is steep and unusable.)
April 14, 2008 at 11:06 AM #186839DCRogersParticipantAny view likely comes with the downside that the canyon down to the 15 will act as a white noise funnel, giving a constant ambient background of poorly-tuned trucks downshifting to climb the steep grade or “Jake Braking” (noisily using the engine rather than the brakes to slow) on the northwards run.
Other examples of the view/noise tradeoff are the spectacular Mission Valley view homes on the north side of the mesa, where you have to raise your voice to talk over the roar of the expressways. Yuck.
(Oh, and don’t be fooled by the lot sizes around here… the property lines were typically drawn to a line at the bottom of the nearest canyon, but most of the land is steep and unusable.)
April 14, 2008 at 11:06 AM #186846DCRogersParticipantAny view likely comes with the downside that the canyon down to the 15 will act as a white noise funnel, giving a constant ambient background of poorly-tuned trucks downshifting to climb the steep grade or “Jake Braking” (noisily using the engine rather than the brakes to slow) on the northwards run.
Other examples of the view/noise tradeoff are the spectacular Mission Valley view homes on the north side of the mesa, where you have to raise your voice to talk over the roar of the expressways. Yuck.
(Oh, and don’t be fooled by the lot sizes around here… the property lines were typically drawn to a line at the bottom of the nearest canyon, but most of the land is steep and unusable.)
April 14, 2008 at 11:20 AM #186795Mark HolmesParticipantFor me the key point is its sale in 2000 at 183K – nearly eight years from the bottom of the last cycle. And it’s square footage of under 700 sq. ft. And its sub-par condition. And the bare rafters in the tiny tiny living room… and the fact that the average income in Normal Heights is around 35K… I could go on, but it basically comes down to the fact that pricing seems completely detached from reality.
Oh, but I do have to say it was nice handing over that info sheet in the realtors’ mid–sentence and walking out.
April 14, 2008 at 11:20 AM #186818Mark HolmesParticipantFor me the key point is its sale in 2000 at 183K – nearly eight years from the bottom of the last cycle. And it’s square footage of under 700 sq. ft. And its sub-par condition. And the bare rafters in the tiny tiny living room… and the fact that the average income in Normal Heights is around 35K… I could go on, but it basically comes down to the fact that pricing seems completely detached from reality.
Oh, but I do have to say it was nice handing over that info sheet in the realtors’ mid–sentence and walking out.
April 14, 2008 at 11:20 AM #186847Mark HolmesParticipantFor me the key point is its sale in 2000 at 183K – nearly eight years from the bottom of the last cycle. And it’s square footage of under 700 sq. ft. And its sub-par condition. And the bare rafters in the tiny tiny living room… and the fact that the average income in Normal Heights is around 35K… I could go on, but it basically comes down to the fact that pricing seems completely detached from reality.
Oh, but I do have to say it was nice handing over that info sheet in the realtors’ mid–sentence and walking out.
April 14, 2008 at 11:20 AM #186849Mark HolmesParticipantFor me the key point is its sale in 2000 at 183K – nearly eight years from the bottom of the last cycle. And it’s square footage of under 700 sq. ft. And its sub-par condition. And the bare rafters in the tiny tiny living room… and the fact that the average income in Normal Heights is around 35K… I could go on, but it basically comes down to the fact that pricing seems completely detached from reality.
Oh, but I do have to say it was nice handing over that info sheet in the realtors’ mid–sentence and walking out.
April 14, 2008 at 11:20 AM #186856Mark HolmesParticipantFor me the key point is its sale in 2000 at 183K – nearly eight years from the bottom of the last cycle. And it’s square footage of under 700 sq. ft. And its sub-par condition. And the bare rafters in the tiny tiny living room… and the fact that the average income in Normal Heights is around 35K… I could go on, but it basically comes down to the fact that pricing seems completely detached from reality.
Oh, but I do have to say it was nice handing over that info sheet in the realtors’ mid–sentence and walking out.
April 14, 2008 at 11:26 AM #186800AecetiaParticipantThe canyon property = “noisy, steep, unusable” and a fire hazard.
April 14, 2008 at 11:26 AM #186823AecetiaParticipantThe canyon property = “noisy, steep, unusable” and a fire hazard.
April 14, 2008 at 11:26 AM #186851AecetiaParticipantThe canyon property = “noisy, steep, unusable” and a fire hazard.
April 14, 2008 at 11:26 AM #186855AecetiaParticipantThe canyon property = “noisy, steep, unusable” and a fire hazard.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.