your guess is as good as mine
-
-
-
Tweet unavailable
-
but each of those buildings houses multiple tenants--all the space that you see there is shared, none of it is "their own" etc
-
what really gets me is that the lawns here are residual--just leftover scraps of land with houses & parking lots plopped on them at random
-
good parks, gardens, etc, have pretty clear boundaries
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Breathing room isn't a waste
-
They are piled on top of and next to each other. All that space is between multi-family blocks; all of it is shared, none private.
-
Hence: they would be better off in single family detached houses. They'd get more privacy and wouldn't chew up as much space to boot.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
40% parking 30% buildings 10% trees 20% leftover doesn't look promising from the map--any photos?
-
Tweet unavailable
-
the essentials
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
this reminds me of the UMass Dartmouth campus
-
strong resemblance, I agree
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It's baffling. I don't get it - wouldn't building just a couple of densely packed structures and a parking building be more efficient?
-
Then you have *all* this room for parks, trails, a high quality commons, or even a fucking pool.
-
It's this weird worst compromise between houses and a residential complex. All the sprawl, none of the benefits.
-
I have to assume there was some kind of zoning/code issue or a desire to have modular structures they could tear down wily-nily.
-
Or maybe I'm the villain here for wanting some kind of central complex w/ 1-2 large high-rise buildings?
-
I don't know. I'd prefer folksy housing people can take pride and ownership in, or a structure that lets the developers focus on service.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.