In discussion of house garag-i-ness, Peter introduced us to the term snout house, a house whose garage dominates the street frontage. Here are some extreme examples from Tanglewood Street Road (off Florence).
After the jump, proof that I didn’t use distorting tricks to make them look more snouty.
The same houses seen from the opposite angle.
Also known as a ‘Garaj Mahal’.
Those are duplexes (looks like it from the two electric meters). Aren’t they maximizing space and achieving lower cost housing?
That’s why I call it Snewton.
These should not be allowed in the city at all. In some ways if we zoned to prevent this, some tear downs might be prevented because a garage can’t be built within the property boundary. This type of design is poor planning for the long run, it reduces walk-ability of the street by creating a cavernous feeling, even with street trees, it may reduce home values down the line(or values don’t increase as much as a traditional “walk-up”) due to design preference, and it just looks plain ugly! We can do better!
Now I can’t “unsee” the snouts.
Tanglewood RD???;)
Are there front doors?
Isn’t it nice that they are different colors?
My guess is that these are pushing the limits of FAR.
There appears to be no room on the site for driveways in side yards to garage space on the side or in the rear. It also looks like this would make for a good recommendation for FAR reduction.
These are behind the Atrium Mall, or whatever it’s called now. I can see the problem brought up of a possible second car being parked over the sidewalk and their inherent ugliness. Oink
I am wondering if the materials that are used to build all these new houses are safer to live in than the older style houses? Does anyone have any data on this? I can only imagine that these hermetically sealed stucco houses that are encased with styro foam panels must be loaded with chemicals that can’t be great for anyone’s health. I would much rather live in a house that has stood the test of time and that has horse hair plaster than risk living in one of these dwellings that are constructed with all sorts of petroleum based materials. Not to mention the chemicals that are usually sprayed on a lot of these new homes lawns and that many of the owners of these homes have to wear dry cleaned wardrobes to the jobs that allow them to pay for these houses…its all a recipe for disaster health wise in my opinion.
You folks cannot be for real. If you are not joking here, then I would have to ask who made you the keepers of all that is good and proper in Newton housing? The snouts on the houses are not nearly as troubling as those down which people like you are looking as you pass useless judgement on those of us just trying to live their lives.
Elmo- I have no problem with you or anyone else living their lives in Newton. All I ask is that when you build a house or a new development that you not destroy my house and quality of life in the process. Is that too much to ask? For some people it seems to be too much to ask.
I don’t think these homes are posing any health risk to you, Newton Gal or anyone else. It doesn’t seem to me that they are stucco anyway. Horse hair plaster isn’t used at all any more, I believe, and is much too difficult to work with anyway. Sheetrock is pretty safe. I don’t see how any of these new developments will destroy your house, unless another highway path uses eminent domain, or effect your quality of life. So you can safely stay in your house with plaster walls and, maybe, lead paint. But beware leaving it or if you do, stay away from landscaping and us “dry clean wearing” business folks.
Marti- I think you might enjoy this link to the breast cancer study that Silent Spring did on Newton between the years of 1982-1992. It relates to my point about modern houses and living not always being great for our health.
http://www.silentspring.org/our-research/communities-high-breast-cancer-rates/newton-breast-cancer-study
Newton Gal, unless your property is under physical danger from your neighbors projects, the notion that your house is begin destroyed is patently absurd. As for harming your “quality of life” well, the arguments you make in that regard are pretty much the defining statements of a NIMBY, and a rather self -centered one at that.
I have an idea, how about posting a picture of your humble abode so the rest of us can pass judgement on it? I wonder if the color choices you have made, the materials you have used, or the nature of your landscaping would be an impediment to my quality of life?
Newton Gal,
Interesting question, and one which prompted me to go a-Googling. It seems that the biggest health-related issue with foam insulation is actually the flame retardant used in the foam, with a class of retardant known as PBDEs giving rise to the greatest concern.
We’re using Icynene spray foam insulation in our new home, and the manufacturer makes a big thing about not using PBDEs. The foam is being installed pretty much around the whole envelope of the house, including underneath the concrete slab of the basement.
As regards the seal, particularly with modern double glazing, yes, that is part of the energy efficiency equation, so it’s important to have sources of fresh air, too.
Our old house, the smallest on the street, was an appalling waster of energy. National Grid would send us comparisons of our energy use in comparison with our neighbors, and it was not a pretty story. When the wind blew, I could feel the drafts coming through the electrical sockets!
I, for one, am looking forward to living in an energy efficient home. You can keep your horsehair and plaster!