- This topic has 216 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 4 months ago by bpnbpn.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 14, 2011 at 9:34 PM #678039March 15, 2011 at 12:53 AM #676940ocrenterParticipant
The problem you are pointing out is really how the builders were really pushing the envelope with their attempts to fit as big of a house on as small of a lot as humanly possible back in the bubble days. whether it be backloading or traditional, the end result as far as full sized SFR goes is utterly ridiculous.
Fieldstone produced these god awful SFR (Silvercrest) at around 3000 sqft around the same time as Maybeck. the lots are more elongated but narrower, but both developments average 4800 sqft per home. the resulting yard space is basically exactly the same:
[img_assist|nid=14753|title=Maybeck vs Silvercrest|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=400|height=205]
so given the same lot size and house size, once again traditional vs backloading yield the same result, so it still comes down to personal preference.
March 15, 2011 at 12:53 AM #676996ocrenterParticipantThe problem you are pointing out is really how the builders were really pushing the envelope with their attempts to fit as big of a house on as small of a lot as humanly possible back in the bubble days. whether it be backloading or traditional, the end result as far as full sized SFR goes is utterly ridiculous.
Fieldstone produced these god awful SFR (Silvercrest) at around 3000 sqft around the same time as Maybeck. the lots are more elongated but narrower, but both developments average 4800 sqft per home. the resulting yard space is basically exactly the same:
[img_assist|nid=14753|title=Maybeck vs Silvercrest|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=400|height=205]
so given the same lot size and house size, once again traditional vs backloading yield the same result, so it still comes down to personal preference.
March 15, 2011 at 12:53 AM #677608ocrenterParticipantThe problem you are pointing out is really how the builders were really pushing the envelope with their attempts to fit as big of a house on as small of a lot as humanly possible back in the bubble days. whether it be backloading or traditional, the end result as far as full sized SFR goes is utterly ridiculous.
Fieldstone produced these god awful SFR (Silvercrest) at around 3000 sqft around the same time as Maybeck. the lots are more elongated but narrower, but both developments average 4800 sqft per home. the resulting yard space is basically exactly the same:
[img_assist|nid=14753|title=Maybeck vs Silvercrest|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=400|height=205]
so given the same lot size and house size, once again traditional vs backloading yield the same result, so it still comes down to personal preference.
March 15, 2011 at 12:53 AM #677745ocrenterParticipantThe problem you are pointing out is really how the builders were really pushing the envelope with their attempts to fit as big of a house on as small of a lot as humanly possible back in the bubble days. whether it be backloading or traditional, the end result as far as full sized SFR goes is utterly ridiculous.
Fieldstone produced these god awful SFR (Silvercrest) at around 3000 sqft around the same time as Maybeck. the lots are more elongated but narrower, but both developments average 4800 sqft per home. the resulting yard space is basically exactly the same:
[img_assist|nid=14753|title=Maybeck vs Silvercrest|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=400|height=205]
so given the same lot size and house size, once again traditional vs backloading yield the same result, so it still comes down to personal preference.
March 15, 2011 at 12:53 AM #678088ocrenterParticipantThe problem you are pointing out is really how the builders were really pushing the envelope with their attempts to fit as big of a house on as small of a lot as humanly possible back in the bubble days. whether it be backloading or traditional, the end result as far as full sized SFR goes is utterly ridiculous.
Fieldstone produced these god awful SFR (Silvercrest) at around 3000 sqft around the same time as Maybeck. the lots are more elongated but narrower, but both developments average 4800 sqft per home. the resulting yard space is basically exactly the same:
[img_assist|nid=14753|title=Maybeck vs Silvercrest|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=400|height=205]
so given the same lot size and house size, once again traditional vs backloading yield the same result, so it still comes down to personal preference.
March 15, 2011 at 11:05 AM #677118sdduuuudeParticipant[quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]Here are some.
[/quote]
Nice size lots.
One problem with alleys is that they require more road maintenance, nearly twice as much as front loading houses.[/quote]
Just so happens those have alleys AND garage in the back. An ally in back is not a requirement for a garage in the back, unless you want to make it a pull-through garage or avoid the side-of-the-house driveway. Those Bay Park houses have driveways leading back to the garage from the front.
March 15, 2011 at 11:05 AM #677174sdduuuudeParticipant[quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]Here are some.
[/quote]
Nice size lots.
One problem with alleys is that they require more road maintenance, nearly twice as much as front loading houses.[/quote]
Just so happens those have alleys AND garage in the back. An ally in back is not a requirement for a garage in the back, unless you want to make it a pull-through garage or avoid the side-of-the-house driveway. Those Bay Park houses have driveways leading back to the garage from the front.
March 15, 2011 at 11:05 AM #677783sdduuuudeParticipant[quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]Here are some.
[/quote]
Nice size lots.
One problem with alleys is that they require more road maintenance, nearly twice as much as front loading houses.[/quote]
Just so happens those have alleys AND garage in the back. An ally in back is not a requirement for a garage in the back, unless you want to make it a pull-through garage or avoid the side-of-the-house driveway. Those Bay Park houses have driveways leading back to the garage from the front.
March 15, 2011 at 11:05 AM #677920sdduuuudeParticipant[quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]Here are some.
[/quote]
Nice size lots.
One problem with alleys is that they require more road maintenance, nearly twice as much as front loading houses.[/quote]
Just so happens those have alleys AND garage in the back. An ally in back is not a requirement for a garage in the back, unless you want to make it a pull-through garage or avoid the side-of-the-house driveway. Those Bay Park houses have driveways leading back to the garage from the front.
March 15, 2011 at 11:05 AM #678264sdduuuudeParticipant[quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]Here are some.
[/quote]
Nice size lots.
One problem with alleys is that they require more road maintenance, nearly twice as much as front loading houses.[/quote]
Just so happens those have alleys AND garage in the back. An ally in back is not a requirement for a garage in the back, unless you want to make it a pull-through garage or avoid the side-of-the-house driveway. Those Bay Park houses have driveways leading back to the garage from the front.
March 15, 2011 at 11:46 AM #677122UCGalParticipant[quote=sdduuuude][quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]Here are some.
[/quote]
Nice size lots.
One problem with alleys is that they require more road maintenance, nearly twice as much as front loading houses.[/quote]
Just so happens those have alleys AND garage in the back. An ally in back is not a requirement for a garage in the back, unless you want to make it a pull-through garage or avoid the side-of-the-house driveway. Those Bay Park houses have driveways leading back to the garage from the front.[/quote]
My house in PA had the garage at the back of the lot – driveway to the front. It’s one of the reasons I could confidently say this was not a *new* trend. That house and community was developed around 1900. I don’t think any of the houses in that area had garages in the front.
March 15, 2011 at 11:46 AM #677179UCGalParticipant[quote=sdduuuude][quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]Here are some.
[/quote]
Nice size lots.
One problem with alleys is that they require more road maintenance, nearly twice as much as front loading houses.[/quote]
Just so happens those have alleys AND garage in the back. An ally in back is not a requirement for a garage in the back, unless you want to make it a pull-through garage or avoid the side-of-the-house driveway. Those Bay Park houses have driveways leading back to the garage from the front.[/quote]
My house in PA had the garage at the back of the lot – driveway to the front. It’s one of the reasons I could confidently say this was not a *new* trend. That house and community was developed around 1900. I don’t think any of the houses in that area had garages in the front.
March 15, 2011 at 11:46 AM #677788UCGalParticipant[quote=sdduuuude][quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]Here are some.
[/quote]
Nice size lots.
One problem with alleys is that they require more road maintenance, nearly twice as much as front loading houses.[/quote]
Just so happens those have alleys AND garage in the back. An ally in back is not a requirement for a garage in the back, unless you want to make it a pull-through garage or avoid the side-of-the-house driveway. Those Bay Park houses have driveways leading back to the garage from the front.[/quote]
My house in PA had the garage at the back of the lot – driveway to the front. It’s one of the reasons I could confidently say this was not a *new* trend. That house and community was developed around 1900. I don’t think any of the houses in that area had garages in the front.
March 15, 2011 at 11:46 AM #677925UCGalParticipant[quote=sdduuuude][quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]Here are some.
[/quote]
Nice size lots.
One problem with alleys is that they require more road maintenance, nearly twice as much as front loading houses.[/quote]
Just so happens those have alleys AND garage in the back. An ally in back is not a requirement for a garage in the back, unless you want to make it a pull-through garage or avoid the side-of-the-house driveway. Those Bay Park houses have driveways leading back to the garage from the front.[/quote]
My house in PA had the garage at the back of the lot – driveway to the front. It’s one of the reasons I could confidently say this was not a *new* trend. That house and community was developed around 1900. I don’t think any of the houses in that area had garages in the front.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.