| Author |
Message |
    
weekends
Citizen
Username: Weekends
Post Number: 86
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 6, 2005 - 8:39 pm: |     |
There is an enormous plywood structure going up on Mountain Avenue where a circa 1950's ranch used to stand. (By Maplewood standards the 50's ranch was a brand new house.) The new structure will probably be a house and not a hotel, but given its size, Art may have some competition in the local lodging business. This thing ToWeRs over its neighbors, and those neighbors are some of the largest houses in Maplewood. While the ranch did look a bit out of place on that block, the size and placement of the plywood palace makes it stick out like a sore thumb.
Didn't the town enact historic districts to avoid this sort of McMansioning? If so, it's not working. What are the rules for tear downs in Maplewood?
|
ffof
Citizen
Username: Ffof
Post Number: 4219
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 6, 2005 - 8:52 pm: | |
To be honest, I don't think it was an official teardown. Some friends of mine are neighbors there and say that they built on the foundation and left one wall.
I think because it is so close to the street, unlike the others, that it stands out. I'll have to walk by soon, it's been a week or so. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 4870
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 6, 2005 - 9:05 pm: | |
I think the historic preservation ordinance focuses on the buildings themselves, and not on the neighborhoods as a whole. If there was a "tear down" of a historic or relatively old home, that might be something that was under the preservation ordinance. As you pointed out, the home that is being replaced was (relatively) new, around here.
The more important concern, is what winds up on the site. I haven't seen the house you mentioned. I've been by the new house near Tuscan School, on Harvard Avenue, and it seems to be one of those houses where the garage doors are the most prominent feature. Perfect for some place with no sidewalks, or little foot traffic, but it seems out of place in that neighborhood. |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2278
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - 8:41 am: | |
The house is being renovated into a beautiful shingle style, two story home, and will be a vast improvement over that horrible little ranch once it's completed.
Some folks just really need to relax and reserve judgement until such time as there is something to be judgemental about. |
weekends
Citizen
Username: Weekends
Post Number: 88
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - 8:52 am: | |
Two story house? Shingle style with those garages? LOL |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 9895
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - 8:54 am: | |
Mountain has several houses that I would classify as mansions on large lots, at least by Maplewood standards. Some of the owners sold off portions of their land for infill such as the ranch in question
The rest of Mountain has fairly large houses on small lots. I agree with me, almost anything would be better than the infill houses. |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2279
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - 8:56 am: | |
They'll be changing the garage doors to tie in with the rest of the house. |
Camnol
Citizen
Username: Camnol
Post Number: 178
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - 9:52 am: | |
Houses don't look very good when they are in the plywood stage.
It's going to be a lovely arts-and-crafts style home. I think you'll find that it fits the neighborhood much better than the ranch did. |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2288
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - 1:49 pm: | |
From Wikipedia:
"McMansion" is a slang architectural term which first came into use in the United States during the 1980s. It is a pejorative description of a particular style of housing that is—as its name suggests—both large like a mansion and as culturally ubiquitous as McDonald's fast food restaurants. In addition to ubiquity, almost every reason to poke fun at McDonald's has been applied metaphorically to this style of housing. Some of the characterizations include: misapplication of -- or total disconnection from -- traditional local or regional style; sometimes cheap and mass-produced construction quality; negative impacts on nature and community; a tendency to look the same despite their superficially unique features.
Starting in the U.S. boom years of the 1980s, McMansions were a new concept intended to fill a gap between the modest suburban tract home and the upscale custom-designed home often found in gate-guarded, lakeshore, or golf-course communities. Some large tracts of McMansions have now been developed around such amenities.
Alternative names for McMansions and similar houses include Beltway Baronial, Starter Castle, Tract Mansions, Mini-Taj Mahals and faux chateau; again, these are pejorative terms. Closely related to McMansions, but significantly different in both physical characteristics and social associations, are the infamous "Persian palaces" of Los Angeles.
Just thought this was interesting, and at all applicable to this particular house. |
weekends
Citizen
Username: Weekends
Post Number: 89
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - 3:05 pm: | |
Had no idea that this topic would strike a nerve in the realtor, or realtor-manque, community.
Plastering it with shingles and swapping the garage doors may help it blend in when it is finished, but it will still tower over the neighboring houses.
|
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2290
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - 3:39 pm: | |
Ooops! Meant to say not at all applicable to this house.
And I'm not a realtor and have no desire to be one.
Architect-manque, maybe. |
Camnol
Citizen
Username: Camnol
Post Number: 180
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - 3:50 pm: | |
Feeling a tad bit cranky today, are we?
Realtor wanna-be? No. I happened to meet the owners, as I was walking my dog. A nice couple, excited to move to Maplewood.
At least wait to complain until there is more than just a bunch of plywood. |
hch
Citizen
Username: Hch
Post Number: 174
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 1:23 pm: | |
Me-
Are you talking about the house on Mountain or the house on Harvard? |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2334
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 1:32 pm: | |
The house on Mountain. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 9934
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 1:40 pm: | |
Drove by over the weekend. The house doesn't seem to be outsized, although it does tower over the house to its right. |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2336
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 1:47 pm: | |
The house seems to me to be no bigger than many of the big houses over there. It's certainly no bigger than the giant Queen Anne victorian on the corner of Mountain and Ridgewood. Nor does it seem to be any bigger than the victorian a couple houses up on the same side. And I doubt, square-footage wise, it's any bigger than those two gigantic tudors that are down the hill. It just looks big because it is a giant hulking mass of plywood, and because it sits much closer to the road than any of it's neighbors.
I think it's really cool to watch the thing take shape. I drive by every chance I get just to see what's new. Can you tell I want to be an architect when I grow up?
And I'm just a bit "J" of the folks who will be living there. A big brand new house in a nice Maplewood neighborhood, that will tie in nicely in terms of architecture and have all the modern conveniences of a brand new home. |
Camnol
Citizen
Username: Camnol
Post Number: 182
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 1:55 pm: | |
Bob,
I think some of the towering has to due with it being on the slope of the hill. For anyone who is curious, you can see the before and after drawings on the architect's Web site:
http://www.clawsonarchitects.com/boards.html
It's the one labeled Reinhardt.
|
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2338
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 2:06 pm: | |
Wow, thanks for that Camnol. I didn't know they had it on the website. That looks like the back elevation--don't see the garage. |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2339
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 2:07 pm: | |
Aha, all the elevations are there if you click on the drawing. I think it's stunning! But then again Craftsman is one of my favorites. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 9935
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 2:20 pm: | |
Camnol, you are probably right about the hill.
Actually the thing that impresses me is that this is basically just what contractors call an "up". The house footprint doesn't seem to be increased at all, other than a bumpout in what I presume is the dining room (typical Maplewood btw).
I think in a few years once the landscaping grows up a little people wouldn't know it is a new house. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 11262
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 3:59 pm: | |
Thanks to this thread, I became curious and drove by this weekend. It doesn't look bad at all. I like it more than the place going up on Harvard Ave.
Youandtheboys, in case you didn't know, Jennifer Lane was built in 1992, so all the houses are from that year. Also, Plymouth Place seems to have mostly or all newish houses. Of course, a lot of those houses are what I call "garage-centric" which I don't care for.
|
shestheone
Citizen
Username: Shestheone
Post Number: 200
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 10:29 pm: | |
tom,
do you know what used to be where jennifer lane currently is? i was told it used to be a school but the source was not reliable. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 11274
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 10:41 pm: | |
My friend who lives there told me, but I'm not sure I remember. I think it was just woods, but as I said, I'm not sure. I bet extuscan can tell you. He's the best Maplewood historian we have on MOL.
|
sac
Supporter
Username: Sac
Post Number: 2907
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 10:52 pm: | |
I remember when they put it in a few years ago and those lots were definitely undeveloped before that. (i.e. "just woods" as Tom says.) |
bill671
Citizen
Username: Bill671
Post Number: 179
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 10:56 pm: | |
As I recall, it was just the reconfiguration of some extra wide and deep lots, I don't think there was any tear down to open up what is now Jennifer Lane.
There was some work done on the house on the southwest corner (left side as you pull in) which I believe had to do with moving around the attached garage, but that's about it. |
extuscan
Citizen
Username: Extuscan
Post Number: 550
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - 7:30 am: | |
Yes, Bill is right. These houses had two particularly huge and deep lots. If you look at google map, I think the next two houses also have very deep wooded lots.
The house on the left had a garage added to the front, but lost a rather attractive front entrance. The house on the right had one bay of the front porch removed to maintain the set back from the new street. (You'll see the door on the corner of the house sort of looks out of place... it should have alot more porch in front of it) "Jennifer" was the developers daughter.
I had a friend in middle school with whom I started a "landscaping" company. We had no equipment, and no experience, but hung a few signs at the train station and actually got a job. The lady on the corner of that block, away from Parker, hired us to bring back the yard of another lady's house who lived, I think, between Maplewood Ave and Ridgewood. I think her name of the lady whos house we actually did stuff to was Rose Gilbert and was an interior decorator and author of such... but I guess she was no landscaper. Anyway after doing that job, lots of digging and cutting and other boy stuff, the lady on Prospect referred us to several of her friends and we ended up cleaning out attics and mowing lawns... and... here's the connection... cutting down a limb off a tree behind a house on Jennifer Lane. Wasn't much a limb I think we were only 13 or 14 at the time.
If you want to see another cut lot, the red house on the corner of Prospect and Summit is one. The garage on the Prospect side of the red house was added on, and in thier backyard was built that modernish house on Summit.
-John |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 9941
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - 7:38 am: | |
John, after Anon called me on mixing up Baker and Dunnell yesterday I am really sensitive to this stuff. Do you mean Elmwood and Summit? I don't think Prospect and Summit meet.
The fascinating part about Jennifer Lane is that drainage was an issue and the neighbors were not interested in giving the developer a variance to run a sewer line. He ended up buy through a proxie a house on the first street west of Prospect (North Terrace?) and running the sewer line through that property. |
extuscan
Citizen
Username: Extuscan
Post Number: 551
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - 11:34 am: | |
Sorry I meant Parker and Summit is the house which now has a house in thier backyard.
-John |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page