Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
bearishgurl
ParticipantI want to add here that the first Apple computer I ever worked on was a MAC SE where I ran a bookkeeping program for a retail biz (2nd job). It was small with a B/W monitor attached to the computer.
My OWN first personal computer (still in the “bulletin board” era) was a Mac Quadra 610 – DOS compatible, running at a 68K clock-speed with a Motorola processor running on “System 7.1” and eventually “System 8” with an Apple (Sony Trinitron) Display.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_Quadra_610
It had a “superdrive” which could read DOS-formatted floppies and SUPERIOR photo editing capabilities which we used CONSTANTLY (Adobe Photoshop). With an ultra-wide SCSI card, we hooked up an external Apple 2x CD player and a 2 gig “LaCie” internal HD, among other “goodies” and maxed it out in both system memory and video memory. At that time, we had about $3300 in it. It NEVER crashed and was VERY fun to use until the advent of JAVA when web pages took a l-o-o-ong time to load on it, lol (abt 2001-2002). It was built like a tank. Someday, I will get an “updated” MAC. They are the most reliable and innovative computers ever invented :=)
ParticipantI just located Jobs’ obit in the LA Times:
. . . Wozniak had created a computer circuit board he was showing off to a group of Silicon Valley computer hobbyists. Jobs saw the device’s potential for broad appeal and persuaded Wozniak to leave his engineering job so they could design computers themselves.
In April 1976, the two launched Apple Computer out of Jobs’ parents’ garage, reproducing Wozniak’s circuit board as their first product.
They called it the Apple I and set the price at $666.66 because Wozniak liked repeating digits. In the following year came the Apple II, which carried a then-novel keyboard and color monitor and became the first popular home computer. When the company went public in 1980, the 25-year-old Jobs made an estimated $217 million…At Apple, Jobs spearheaded the creation of a computer he called Lisa (also the name of his daughter born to a former girlfriend). The cocky, headstrong Jobs tangled with Lisa engineers over the direction of the computer, and Apple executives curtailed his role in the project. “It hurt a lot,” Jobs told a Playboy interviewer.
[img_assist|nid=15424|title=Apple “Lisa” (circa 1983)|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=280|height=311]
Jobs turned his attention to a small research effort called Macintosh, producing what he described as “the most insanely great computer in the world,” with a graphics-rich interface and a mouse that allowed users to navigate much more easily than they could with keyboard commands.
In 1984, Apple promoted the Macintosh with a television spot that aired during the Super Bowl. The minute-long commercial portrayed a sledgehammer-hurling runner heroically smashing the image of a sinister Big Brother figure, who was preaching to an assembly of gray drones . . .
see the very interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Lisa
and: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Brennan-Jobs
It appears from the timeline given here that Brennan may have waited until Jobs “made it big” and her daughter was as old as 4+ yrs old to file for determination of paternity and child support.
Participant[quote=svelte][quote=bearishgurl]
We can’t judge Jobs or any “natural father” of that era who was likely legally between a “rock and a hard space” or kept completely ignorant of the birth of his child by the mother.[/quote]I can certainly judge Mr. Jobs and so can you.
This man claimed to be sterile!!! Not only that, he has now fathered a total of 4 children!
I find it ludicrous, bg, for you to defend a man who waited until a court ordered test to find out whether he was a father. Absolutely ludicrous. It’s an insult to all the upstanding fathers in this world.[/quote]
svelte, no one is condoning “deadbeat dad” behavior around here. You still haven’t answered those all-important questions that could shed light on the difference between your situation in that era vs. Jobs’ situation. Have you read Jobs’ court papers … his response to Paternity and Child Support? Do you actually know how it all went down?
How many prominent “politicians, celebrities and millionaires/billionaires” have we heard of in our lifetimes who had “biological children” come out of the woodwork only AFTER they became famous and/or very successful??
If you were Jobs and slapped with a paternity suit 14-16 years after your alleged child’s birth, how would you respond to it??
[quote=svelte]I submit to you it was like an earlier poster claimed, Steve did not want to share his money.
This trait continued to come out in him until his death.
Mr. Jobs was worth $6.5 billion dollars. That’s billion with a B! Or as you’re so found of doing $6.5 BILLION.
Yet when Mr. Gates approached him about donating some of it to charity, Steve Jobs said no.[/quote]
…Bono, U2’s lead singer and a noted activist, quickly responded to the Times piece, writing that “Apple’s contribution to our fight against AIDS in Africa has been invaluable.”
The company had given “tens of millions of dollars that have transformed the lives of more than two million Africans through H.I.V. testing, treatment and counseling. This is serious and significant. And Apple’s involvement has encouraged other companies to step up,” Bono wrote. “Just because he’s been extremely busy, that doesn’t mean that he and his wife, Laurene, have not been thinking about these things.”
Jobs’s supporters say it also may be impossible to know from public records what he gave away because he could have requested anonymity. Indeed, his plans for the rest of his wealth may not be known until well after his death.
The fact that he doesn’t appear on lists of public giving “doesn’t necessarily mean that he’s not giving generously,” said Adriene Davis of Indiana University’s Center on Philanthropy, which tracks such gifts.
What may partly explain Jobs’s absence from the donor rolls is that he was so busy with his company.
Jobs’s most direct effort at philanthropy was when he set up the Steven P. Jobs Foundation, shortly after he was forced out of Apple in 1985. To run that effort, he hired Mark Vermilion, who first spent time at Humanitas International, a charity founded by Joan Baez, and then headed Apple’s community efforts, which began when Vermilion proposed the company give away computers to nonprofits.
Jobs wanted his foundation to focus on nutrition and vegetarianism. Vermilion favored programs that promoted social entrepreneurship. But then Jobs got tied up building another company called NeXT and the foundation shut down.
“I said, ‘You really need to spend some time on this’ and he said ‘I can’t right now,’ ” Vermilion said. “I really don’t blame Steve. I think I could have done a better job on selling him on my idea or I should have done his idea.”
Had Jobs, who died at 56, lived longer, he might have gotten around to more public charities, Vermilion said, but because he was a perfectionist, he would have needed to devote a lot of his scarce time to it.
“He’s gotten a lot of criticism for not giving away tons of money,” Vermilion said. “But I think it’s a bum rap. There’s only so many hours in a week, and he created so many incredible products. He really contributed to culture and society.”
(emphasis added)
How do you know Jobs’ heirs won’t set up a foundation? Do you think they need that much money to “live on??”
Participant[quote=CA renter] . . . We are now in the process of “upgrading” pretty much everything our new house, and are not thinking at all about resale value, since we plan on staying here for the rest of our lives (God be willing). The whole notion of housing being an “investment” is what got us into all this housing trouble in the first place.[/quote]
Of course you want to make your recently-purchased property exactly as you want it for your daily needs, CAR. Especially if you bought it a bit under market. HOWEVER, I DO think it is financially foolish to install a +/- $3K “gourmet range” into an (avg) $350K property in a working-class neighborhood, under ANY circumstances, for example. Perhaps in an (avg) $550K neighborhood, it might be “worth it” to do so, if the homeowner stays long enough to enjoy it themselves.
But if you were planning to sell (or rent your property out) in less than 3 years from now (as I am), would you STILL invest the kind of $$ in it that you are currently spending??
Participant[quote=svelte][quote=sdduuuude]
And haven’t you heard it is impolite to speak ill of the dead? I am not that much of a Steve Jobs fan, but he’s interesting and you know what – he’s dead so show some respect. I’ve lost alot of it for several of you.[/quote]A dead jerk is still a jerk.
Sorry, I can’t sit idly by while people worship a man who showed the worst trait possible. I can forgive a lot of things, but walking out on a child – and thereby having her and her mother live on welfare while he raked in the bucks – is not something I’m willing to forgive.
You can go back six generations in my family and the males have all become fathers by 21. I’m one of them. But we all did the right thing and did not turn our back on our responsibilities.
If you fire the gun, you’re responsible for where the bullet goes. To do otherwise makes you a jerk unworthy of worship.[/quote]
svelte, if you don’t mind my asking, is the child you’re speaking of here currently over the age of 30? If so, did your “girlfriend-at-the-time” allow you to pay her maternity bills and visit your child regularly from infancy? Did you know she was pregnant immediately after she found out? Did the mom consent to marry you while pregnant or soon after having your child?
If you can answer “yes” to any or all of the above questions, then count yourself among the “very fortunate” of your era, who had the backing and consent of the mom so YOU could be a dad.
It wasn’t like that back then for a GREAT MANY “natural fathers.”
Participant[quote=ocrenter]one interesting find I came across is Jobs is the son of a Syrian foreign exchange student. Much like Obama.
in the 60’s and 70’s, the cream of the crop of many 3rd world countries were selected to come to this country to study at our top universities. with the understanding that they can then go back to make their perspective countries better…[/quote]
Yes, ocrenter, in the 70’s, I went to college with MANY “foreign exchange students” from the middle east. However, Jobs was born in 1955. I don’t know if there were as many foreign exchange students attending US colleges back at that time.
Participant[quote=svelte]Are we talking about the Steve Jobs who got his high school girlfriend pregnant and then denied this beautiful child was his, claiming in court documents that he was sterile? And not taking responsibility until testing had advanced and the court ordered him tested?
Is this the man that is being lionized?[/quote]
svelte, we don’t know the backstory surrounding Brennan’s pregnancy and her daughter’s birth: i.e. what Brennan told her daughter about her father, who Brennan told her friends and relatives the father was; whether or not Jobs and Brennan had an open relationship (and Jobs suspected the father might be someone else); whether Brennan and Jobs were still “together” during her pregnancy, whether Brennan told Jobs he was the father during her pregnancy, whether Brennan allowed Jobs to see his daughter after she was born, whether Brennan moved away from Jobs and initially kept the birth a secret (until she learned Jobs “made it big” and she wanted some of the action?) which, ironically, was just about the same time as the advent of “DNA testing.”
In Jobs’ day, mothers had all the cards and they played them close to the vest, often to take advantage of available public assistance without having to name a father.
see: http://law.justia.com/cases/california/calapp3d/15/244.html
(at p. 251)
In CA, mothers applying for public assistance of any kind were not required to name the father(s) of their children to receive benefits until the passage of the (1996) Welfare Reform Act. They could simply tell their caseworker that they “didn’t know.”
see: http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/rb/RB_297TMRB.pdf
In CA, unwed fathers in Jobs’ era had no rights to any decisions about an unborn child unless the mother allowed them to pay for their maternity care and develop a relationship with the infant by “bringing it into their homes” and family fold and very few unwed mothers consented to that, especially during the child’s infancy. The mothers of that era could even get married and their *new* husbands’ would have more rights to their child than the “natural” father because they were the “presumed” father by law (even if not married to the mother at the time of the child’s birth). Hence, these husbands-after-the-fact could adopt the child without the consent of the “natural” father.
Adoption of Alexander M. (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 430, 436
…Family Code section 7631 is best understood in the context of its statutory framework. In 1975, the Legislature enacted the Uniform Parentage Act (UPA) as former Civil Code sections 7000-7021 (now Fam. Code, §§ 7600-7730). Although the UPA was intended to “provide a comprehensive scheme for judicial determination of paternity” (Michael M. v. Giovanna F. (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 1272, 1278 [7 Cal.Rptr.2d 460]), the Legislature perceived a loophole in the law, which it remedied in 1979 by enacting Senate Bill No. 540. This bill added subdivision (d) of former Civil Code section 7006 (now Fam. Code, § 7631) and amended former Civil Code section 7017 (now Fam. Code, §§ 7660-7666). (Stats. 1979, ch. 752, §§ 1-2, pp. 2607-2610.)
[2a] The UPA “creates three classes of parents: mothers, fathers who are presumed fathers, and fathers who are not presumed fathers.” (Adoption of Michael H. (1995) 10 Cal.4th 1043 at p. 1051.) A man is rebuttably presumed to be the natural father of a child if (1) the child is born during his actual or attempted marriage to the mother or within 300 days after its termination; (2) he marries the mother after the child’s birth and is either named on the birth certificate or agrees to support the child; or (3) “[h]e receives the child into his home and openly holds out the child as his natural child.” (Fam. Code, § 7611, subd. (d); former Civ. Code, § 7004, subd. (a).) A biological father may or may not qualify as a presumed father. “[T]o become a presumed father, a man who has neither married nor attempted to marry his child’s biological mother must not only openly and publicly admit paternity, but must also physically bring the child into his home.” (Adoption of Michael H., supra, 10 Cal.4th at p. 1051.)
In 1979, before Senate Bill No. 540 was enacted, only presumed fathers could block an adoption. If a child had a presumed father, his consent was required. (Former Civ. Code, § 7017, subd. (a).) If a child did not have a presumed father, all possible fathers were entitled to notice of pending adoption proceedings, but only those who could qualify as presumed fathers after a court hearing were entitled to block the adoption. (Former Civ. Code, § 7017, subdivision (d).) fn. 4 Although the statute provided that an alleged natural father of a child without a presumed father could bring an action “to determine the existence of the father and child relationship” (former Civ. Code, § 7006, subd. (c)), fn. 5 this had no effect on a pending adoption unless he could also qualify as a presumed father.
The case of Adoption of Marie R. (1978) 79 Cal.App.3d 624 [145 Cal.Rptr. 122] provided the impetus for Senate Bill No. 540. There, the baby was conceived while the mother was engaged to be married to Charles K. The mother broke off the engagement, and although Charles wanted to keep the baby, she decided to place the child for adoption. Charles offered to pay for the mother’s prenatal support and expenses of birth, but she refused. She also refused to allow him to receive the baby into his home. Three days before the baby’s birth, the mother married Scott R.; when the baby was two days old, the mother placed her with prospective adoptive parents…I discussed this issue here: http://piggington.com/ignore_ron_paul_are_the_new_marching_orders?page=1
(begin pg 2)
[quote=bearishgurl]…Divorced and unwed dads never got custody of their children, even if the mom was a flake, drug addict, prostitute or all three. There was nothing preventing one parent from withholding child visitation from the other parent, which deprived countless children of the other parent. In CA, many dads never even realized they HAD children and (unknowingly) lost them thru adoption, because the law didn’t require the mom to name them as the father and notify them! When they found out about the adoption (thru friends/relatives and tried to take custody of them during or directly after the process, they were denied and told by the court that they “failed to offer to pay for prenatal care, failed to bond with the child, failed to support it and bring it into their homes,” etc. How could they do any of these things when they never knew the mom was pregnant or she refused to talk to them during her pregnancy? In a nutshell, the above was nearly the exact language of a whole host of statutes in CA that have since been repealed. Yes, the lives of children have been greatly improved since the early/mid seventies.[/quote]
CA Family Code section 7600 et. seq. (pertinent sections 7630-7633) was enacted January 1, 1994, (repealing former CA Civil Code section 230 et. seq.) in the wake of Kelsey and other notable cases did away with the “doctrine” of “illegitimacy.”
see: http://law.justia.com/cases/california/cal4th/1/816.html
The outcome of Kelsey was the precursor to Family Code sections 7630-7633, which, among other provisions requires the mother to notify the natural father of her born or unborn child (enabling him to establish paternity if he wishes) at the signing of a contract for adoption and before the adoption proceedings go to court.
We can’t judge Jobs or any “natural father” of that era who was likely legally between a “rock and a hard space” or kept completely ignorant of the birth of his child by the mother.
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]This is worth listening to: http://mashable.com/2011/10/06/steve-jobs-commencement-speech/
His life is very inspirational to me.[/quote]
I heard this a few months ago and also again last night. Jobs is very inspirational to me, also.
Participant[quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2][quote=walterwhite]I like meadowview the very best but my wife wasn’t into it.
Check it out– right by the mall 1/2 acre lots, kind of hidden.
Still cheap.
I love it there.
i like this one:
http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/29880-La-Corona-Ct-92591/home/6181344%5B/quote%5D
That was a nice place WW,[/quote]
I thought so, too, and love one-story homes of about this size. But I feel if one were to put it in escrow now, their fire insurance binder would give them six months (at most) to replace the (now outlawed) shake roof or be non-renewed. Some companies would insist it be done in escrow (which would require a longer escrow and more negotiations with the seller).
Participanthttp://news.yahoo.com/steve-jobs-dies–apple-chief-created-personal-computer–ipad–ipod–iphone.html
I think of Steve as a visionary, way ahead of his time…my condolences go out to his family.
Participant[quote=jpinpb]I really only started this thread and recently added the Plum property to show how PL is seeing some declines. Declines that were not happening two years ago. While places in Temecula, Chula Vista, and even Mira Mesa were getting hit hard a few years ago, cities like PL were holding their own, seemingly unscathe.[/quote]
Yes, I understand and appreciate you finding this latest sold comp which has a LOT of expensive work done to it. As a possible future “aspiring buyer” in that area, I can totally appreciate all this work that I would end up having to do myself and also contract for, especially when it is done correctly with high quality materials, such as in this gem. I couldn’t even afford some of the work that was done on this (circa 1930) property. Its recent buyers are VERY fortunate.
Participant[quote=AN][quote=bearishgurl]Buyers with a lot of cash often gravitate to areas which will afford them more privacy, convenience and views (read: “custom” homes on larger-than-std lots). This type of privacy usually can’t be found in a typical tract development.[/quote]
Funny you said this in the same thread as praising the Plum house and dissing the Del Mar house I posted. The PL house sits on a 5k sq-ft lot (i.e. no privacy), have no real view (at least not view from your backyard or from inside your house). While the DM house have both of those features. When I think of custom homes with privacy and view, I think of Rancho Santa Fe, not PL. Anything less than 2 acre isn’t that private. BTW, you forget good schools as well.[/quote]AN, you seem to be going around and around about how great this DM condo is. It is over 3000 sf and if it is actually situated on a 5000 sf lot, I would be surprised. There is almost zero front yard, the driveway is not long enough to park a car in (its CC&R’s likely forbid parking there) and there is only a patio in back, overlooking a park (golf course?). Its bathroom(s) are all original and the pool area maintenance leaves something to be desired, considering the monthly dues there are $450.
I never stated well-heeled buyers would consider Plum a “private” estate-like home. The “Plum” sold comp shown here is a MC/upper MC home in a fantastic area with a good sized yard, a balcony and enclosed patio and a fantastic view of the City in the street. The houses on this side of Plum do not have a view of dtn SD unless a permitted second story is attached and then it may only have a “peek” view if situated on a corner lot. An expansive view of dtn on this street would likely cost much more than this property and may even be a “fixer.” The average lot size in Fleetridge is actually over 7K.
And now you’re back to your “school” argument. There is nothing wrong with PL High and High Tech High. And some of the elem schools around there have GREAT scores!
I don’t care what the majority of RE buyers who post here seem to perceive is “important” or that a portion of them may be chasing “school scores.” I do not believe (young family) Pigg buyers are representative of County buyers overall. I believe the particular younger demographic who are currently parents of very young children and post frequently here are but a small microcosm of RE buyers in this county but are the majority who post here.
There is NO PLACE for children to play at the DM condo except on association property where they will likely constantly be in violation of CC&R’s.
You mentioned other desirable “private” areas but they are all within a “covenant.” The property rights within that covenant are very, very restrictive, i.e, you can’t park up and down the “streets” (lol, more like “easements”) and place a portable basketball net at the curb for months/years like you can in MM 🙂 An owner doesn’t have those same restrictions in PL unless what they are doing actually violates City Code.
AN, why don’t you endeavor to buy yourself a property within your coveted DM HOA or the RSF covenant in the coming years and see if you like living there and paying for all its duplicated services (which are publicly provided by the City to PL residents)?? Better yet, rent in those places first for $4K++ per month before you make a buying decision you may later regret :={
Participant[quote=jpinpb] . . . To get 2003 pricing along the coast that realtors (perhaps not on this blog) have claimed is immune is really saying something. It was only a short few years ago that I remember hearing people say the coast would see little decline in pricing. Others were saying to just wait, it will happen eventually. They are occurring, however slowly and gradually, and on properties that are not fixers.[/quote]
Yes, agree that it is happening sporadically and 2210 Plum is a good example. If a buyer wants a “special” property like this where a previous owner has already put in all or nearly all the work, they will have to find a VERY motivated seller that MUST sell NOW, no matter what and/or one with a lender that will agree to take it in the shorts and/or with a 2nd TD holder that they defaulted upon who is left with no choice but to take .06 on the dollar in an “approved” short sale (i.e. they cannot bid on the property in a trustees sale b/c the 1st TD is not in default OR the opening bid is too high). And it is not feasible for the 2nd TD holder to sue the trustor(s) for the recourse money.
These kind of (SFR) deals are few and far between in an area such as PL 92106, IMO.
Participant[quote=AN]I don’t think anyone is disputing that there are places that only see 2003 price thus far. You don’t have to be coastal or expensive/desirable like PL to see that. I’ve shown the same thing happening in Mira Mesa and 4S Ranch. These two are far from PL in term of desirability scale, especially Mira Mesa. Yet, I’m not seeing too many that close below 2003 price as well. I’m sure there are other in land areas that are not as desirable as Point Loma that also are not seeing price much below 2003 price as well. So, I don’t think being coastal or being ultra desirable have much to do with it.[/quote]
AN, I don’t know how many tracts in MM were built in the last decade but most of 4S was built in 2003 or AFTER. Most of those housing units are/were recent “bubble-era” purchases as new construction or short sale/REO.
Lower-priced housing areas have been selling better than higher-priced housing areas since lending standards have been much tighter (approx 2007-2008).
[quote=AN]Especially since I just shown a property in Del Mar that just closed at 2000 price and it’s not a fixer, not built during the bubble, and are >$1M. I think Del Mar is very desirable. Del Mar have ~6700 household and Point Loma have ~7100 household. Both Point Loma and Del Mar have about 50 something NOD/NOT/REO. So, just because an area is ultra desirable and have low NOD/NOT/REO doesn’t mean you can’t get 2000 pricing.[/quote]
Again, that (large) DM unit you posted here is a (less-desirable) PUD heavily encumbered by an (expensive) HOA. I would surmise that what few remaining vacant lots (on which to build an SFR in DM) cost just as much as that PUD (with or without utilities), if not more.
AN, where are you getting the data that 50 properties in both 92106 and 92014 are currently in distress? And are these primarily condos or SFRs?
Del Mar has always been more dense that 92106. It is comprised of 37.5% multifamily units:
For 92014
Structure Type Number Percent California Avg. National Avg.
Total housing units 6,750 100.00 % – –
1-unit, detached
4,217 62.47 % 56.35 % 60.37 %
1-unit, attached
1,106 16.39 % 7.63 % 5.68 %
2 units
148 2.19 % 2.68 % 4.29 %
3 or 4 units
138 2.04 % 5.71 % 4.72 %
5 to 9 units
277 4.10 % 5.92 % 4.66 %
10 to 19 units
277 4.10 % 5.07 % 3.99 %
20 or more units
580 8.59 % 11.98 % 8.59 %
Mobile home
7 0.10 % 4.40 % 7.49 %
Boat, RV, van, etc.
0 0.00 % 0.26 % 0.22 %see: http://zipatlas.com/us/ca/san-diego/zip-92014.htm#structures
Point Loma (92106) is comprised of 28% multifamily units:
For 92106
Structure Type Number Percent California Avg. National Avg.
Total housing units 7,169 100.00 % – –
1-unit, detached
5,165 72.05 % 56.35 % 60.37 %
1-unit, attached
188 2.62 % 7.63 % 5.68 %
2 units
120 1.67 % 2.68 % 4.29 %
3 or 4 units
427 5.96 % 5.71 % 4.72 %
5 to 9 units
428 5.97 % 5.92 % 4.66 %
10 to 19 units
328 4.58 % 5.07 % 3.99 %
20 or more units
452 6.30 % 11.98 % 8.59 %
Mobile home
9 0.13 % 4.40 % 7.49 %
Boat, RV, van, etc.
52 0.73 % 0.26 % 0.see: http://zipatlas.com/us/ca/san-diego/zip-92106.htm#structures
[quote=AN]In essence, what you’re really saying is, some areas, you just can’t get good darn deals, and I agree with that. I just disagree with the point that all of those areas are ultra desirable…[/quote]
To each his own . . . you still appear to be “fixated” on the notion that current average sales prices should reflect certain (arbitrary) years’ average sold comparables in EVERY area and it just isn’t so and will never be so. SD County housing stock is too diverse and each of its areas’ is “desirable” to certain subsets of buyers and owners spend a LOT more $$ rehabbing properties in historically “desirable” areas. Buyers with a lot of cash often gravitate to areas which will afford them more privacy, convenience and views (read: “custom” homes on larger-than-std lots). This type of privacy usually can’t be found in a typical tract development.
-
AuthorPosts
