That is bad - it looks like the house would tip over if the three people all stood on one side of it.
I bet Randy Gragg would love to live in it.
How about a contest to see who can send you the worst looking example of architecture in Portland? You could limit the entries to structures built in the last twenty years under the modern planning codes.
This "home" is located near the intersection of SW Barbur and SW Hamilton on Vista View Terrace. Notice it has no parking. It is freaky to be inside, a rats maze of singular, separate rooms. This is METRO density as Sam the Tram endorses.
Grrr...nothing better than looking out your bedroom window, right into another person's bedroom window! Also, I love the comment above about it being a "double-high" rather than a double-wide! Snark, snark!
I actually live in a double wide. With a 40 by 60 shop and five wonderful acres. I really don't see the comparison unless you are an elitist like Obama. Keep laughing children
I am all for maximizing the use of space. I lived briefly on the east coast last year and just fell in love with cities full of rowhouses. They're narrow like the skinny infill above, but they don't look like a giant turd. Beautiful brick buildings to squeeze lots of people into a smaller space. I would absolutely LOVE to see similar buildings here. I would be embarrassed to live in a skinny infill like that.
What kind of sick mind would accept payment to build something like that?
Bryan - it's hard to tell if you are trying to show a bit of humor or if you are serious. I dislike these skinny houses, but comparing them to row houses ... the skinny house wins. Because unless your row home is on the end you don't get windows on the sides of your home. Skinny homes and row houses, two sides of a really, really, bad idea.
This is what you get when you push "density".
We cant build new subdivisions, so they have to put more homes on smaller lots. Be careful what you wish for.
Our house fills most of a sub-sized 30x100 (3/4 size) lot. The eaves touch those of the house next door, and from my bathroom I can pretty much reach through the window to flush their toilet (but I don't). These houses were built here in Portland in 1890. They're pretty nice.
I used to own a 1950s era rowhose in San Francisco's Miraloma Park back in the 1980s. It is so much better than the absolute CRAP I see being built here as to be no contest. Just for starters, it had a tunnel type two car garage that could hold two full size cars. A driveway long enough that someone could park in it without blocking the sidewalk; and a skinny fenced yard that extended about 60 feet from the rear of the house. There are thousands more just like it all over San Francisco. The design might be "cookie cutter" by some people's standards, but they were sure a lot nicer than almost anything I see built in this area in the past 10 years. Lots of kids grew up in these homes and they had room to play in the back, without going to some dog-poop infested park.
Guys, guys. Remember the lots here aren't deep enough to build a shotgun shack. So they just stacked the back on top of the front and voila'. So very New Orleans NW style don't you think.
Comments (22)
At least it's not one of those "snout-houses"....
Posted by max | April 15, 2008 5:10 PM
That is bad - it looks like the house would tip over if the three people all stood on one side of it.
I bet Randy Gragg would love to live in it.
How about a contest to see who can send you the worst looking example of architecture in Portland? You could limit the entries to structures built in the last twenty years under the modern planning codes.
Posted by Musician | April 15, 2008 5:30 PM
Is that a "double-high" instead of a "double-wide"?
Aren't folks concerned about the invitation to cyclones?
Posted by godfry | April 15, 2008 5:32 PM
Could it be a Palazzo?
Posted by Bark Munster | April 15, 2008 5:32 PM
Too bad the top is cropped or you'd see the Netherlands-style windmill up there.
Posted by cc | April 15, 2008 5:40 PM
Could it be a Palazzo?
WHY YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING BAD ABOUT RANDY P., PUNK? YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUSE ARE TALKIN' ABOUT. SHADDAP IF YA KNOW WHAT'S GOOD FOR YA.
Posted by "Bob" | April 15, 2008 5:40 PM
the Netherlands-style windmill
I thought we were going for the Barcelona look, not Amsterdam.
Posted by Jack Bog | April 15, 2008 5:42 PM
Maybe its small enough I could afford it.
Posted by Chris Coyle | April 15, 2008 5:47 PM
This "home" is located near the intersection of SW Barbur and SW Hamilton on Vista View Terrace. Notice it has no parking. It is freaky to be inside, a rats maze of singular, separate rooms. This is METRO density as Sam the Tram endorses.
Posted by lw | April 15, 2008 7:09 PM
Grrr...nothing better than looking out your bedroom window, right into another person's bedroom window! Also, I love the comment above about it being a "double-high" rather than a double-wide! Snark, snark!
Posted by BoggyWoggy | April 15, 2008 8:49 PM
How many push-outs?
Posted by Abe | April 15, 2008 8:52 PM
I actually live in a double wide. With a 40 by 60 shop and five wonderful acres. I really don't see the comparison unless you are an elitist like Obama. Keep laughing children
Posted by Ace | April 15, 2008 8:58 PM
I am all for maximizing the use of space. I lived briefly on the east coast last year and just fell in love with cities full of rowhouses. They're narrow like the skinny infill above, but they don't look like a giant turd. Beautiful brick buildings to squeeze lots of people into a smaller space. I would absolutely LOVE to see similar buildings here. I would be embarrassed to live in a skinny infill like that.
What kind of sick mind would accept payment to build something like that?
Posted by Bryan | April 15, 2008 9:06 PM
Bryan - it's hard to tell if you are trying to show a bit of humor or if you are serious. I dislike these skinny houses, but comparing them to row houses ... the skinny house wins. Because unless your row home is on the end you don't get windows on the sides of your home. Skinny homes and row houses, two sides of a really, really, bad idea.
Posted by native oregonian | April 16, 2008 6:13 AM
This is what you get when you push "density".
We cant build new subdivisions, so they have to put more homes on smaller lots. Be careful what you wish for.
Posted by Jon | April 16, 2008 6:26 AM
What would you rather have them do with that land?
Skinny homes are actually pretty good, for those on a lower budget.
And frankly, I'd rather have a neighborhood of skinny homes over a neighborhood of McMansions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMansion
Posted by Justin | April 16, 2008 7:12 AM
Darn, that's ugly!
Posted by al | April 16, 2008 7:52 AM
To live in it, you would have to get rid of the Queen bed and sofa and scale down to a futon and a love seat.
The big screen TV would have to go.
Also, it's so small you'd have to go outside to change your mind.
Posted by none | April 16, 2008 8:06 AM
Our house fills most of a sub-sized 30x100 (3/4 size) lot. The eaves touch those of the house next door, and from my bathroom I can pretty much reach through the window to flush their toilet (but I don't). These houses were built here in Portland in 1890. They're pretty nice.
Posted by Allan L. | April 16, 2008 9:09 AM
I used to own a 1950s era rowhose in San Francisco's Miraloma Park back in the 1980s. It is so much better than the absolute CRAP I see being built here as to be no contest. Just for starters, it had a tunnel type two car garage that could hold two full size cars. A driveway long enough that someone could park in it without blocking the sidewalk; and a skinny fenced yard that extended about 60 feet from the rear of the house. There are thousands more just like it all over San Francisco. The design might be "cookie cutter" by some people's standards, but they were sure a lot nicer than almost anything I see built in this area in the past 10 years. Lots of kids grew up in these homes and they had room to play in the back, without going to some dog-poop infested park.
Posted by Dave A. | April 16, 2008 9:40 AM
Guys, guys. Remember the lots here aren't deep enough to build a shotgun shack. So they just stacked the back on top of the front and voila'. So very New Orleans NW style don't you think.
Greg C
Posted by Greg C | April 16, 2008 11:41 AM
none, you are a kick!
Posted by Musician | April 16, 2008 9:32 PM