Jump to content

When bulldozers attack mcmansions


retromodernjeff

Recommended Posts

Makes me happy.

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>">
name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350">

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes me happy.

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>">

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350">

It's a terrible waste of materials that will simply clog up the landfill. Why couldn't they make this housing for vets, or something like that.

It would make me happy if they were salvaging and then destroying mcmansions to bring in bungalows. Hey there's an idea. Kingwood, here we come!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a terrible waste of materials that will simply clog up the landfill. Why couldn't they make this housing for vets, or something like that.

We don't know much because the commentator is just a random member of the public that had apparently read a newspaper article and forgotten most of it. We do know that the whole subdivision was foreclosed on by the bank, and by all indications, nobody was living there. For all we know, the homes weren't built out on the inside, they may have been ransacked by looters and vandals, they may have been built so poorly that if the bank were to try and sell them to the public there could've been legal recourse against the bank, or it could've been some other major problem related to the reason that the subdivision failed so monumentally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

ABC news had a story on this. The bank decided it was cheaper to demolish the homes than complete them in a declining market. Most of them didn't even have dry wall up yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to say that this makes me "happy". There would be far less waste if the homes were completed. Plus, this is a jarring example of how many vacant homes exist in the US...approximately 4 million currently, about 3% of all US homes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This doesn't make me happy either, and I'm no fan of this type of suburban sprawl. It's the same reason I've never agreed with the so-called "eco-terrorists" -- it's wasteful and counterproductive. I at least hope they retrieved as much reusable materials before demolishing the houses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to say that this makes me "happy". There would be far less waste if the homes were completed. Plus, this is a jarring example of how many vacant homes exist in the US...approximately 4 million currently, about 3% of all US homes.

I don't believe that even for a second. I think that the level of physical vacancy has to be much, much higher. They probably were quoting a figure that is related to vacancy, but that isn't vacancy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...