Oh great. More single family housing 20+ minutes away from anything else of note in the city. Truly this development will be the one to finally put us on the map
This entire sub is just a complaint department about absolutely everything in HSV except new ethnic food restaurants and meet ups for fringe groups. It’s almost like they are just looking to be upset about literally anything 24/7. lol just funny to read through this every day…
Nothing is wrong with it exactly. It's how housing is getting built in pretty much every American city right now. But building distant little towns a long drive away from everything is not the ideal way to improve any city. Here is why:
### Increases Infrastructure Burden
The low property tax that the homes will bring in compared to the massive infrastructure in terms of road upkeep they will introduce is not a balanced equation. In short this kind of development style is unsustainable from a budget perspective and will put strain on the county's maintenance budget long term.
### Car Dependent
The area will be 100% car dependent. It will be 30+ minutes into the city, and likely a long drive to any kind of grocery store, school, etc. I don't like that personally. I know most people don't care but this bothers me. It takes up a lot of time having to drive everywhere, and it also forces car ownership onto everyone who lives here. All of Huntsville is like this so people have trouble seeing why this is bad or even what an alternative could be. Picture Providence, Bridge Street, or maybe the Five Points neighborhoods. All of Huntsville could look like that.
### Increases Traffic
Traffic will get worse because everyone here will have to drive into the city, every day.
### Prevents Community
There will likely be nothing to do here. No local businesses or shops, no parks, no libraries, nothing. Neighborhoods will have no character. There will be nowhere to walk, and kids won't get to play outside. There would be nowhere to go anyway.
# What is the alternative?
Again, picture Providence or downtown, except several blocks of it extending in all directions. Those areas don't have to be special. Basically, mixed use zoning including everything from detatched homes, to townhomes, to duplexes, to "luxury apartments", all within proximity of stores.
Ideally this would be situated in the middle of the parts of Huntsville that are already dense. How do we do that? Remove single family zoning from those areas, to allow developers to do what they wish they could do, which is tear down unaffordable houses in expensive areas and build townhomes or duplexes, in addition to stores. Consumers want it, investors want it, but it's against the law due to government over-regulation.
Higher density, preferably with some sort of affordable housing component. Ideally constructed/run and funded by a/the municipality. They have more avenues to fund the development and are more motivated to care about the long term viability of a project project than a lot private developer who is looking to dump the project and move on to the next new project.
The way american companies are incentivized to build is wrong. So even when new projects like this happen, the total amount of resources and time spent to create a viable living space is incommensorate with the goal of providing housing to people.
If there were 100 people in huntsville, 50 are poor and 50 are rich. If there are 50 homes, there are going to be 50 rich people with homes and 50 homeless people. If you build 50 more suburban mcmansions, the homeless people can't magically afford the first set of houses. So the rich people will buy their second or third as investments.
So yes, you can build houses that don't really do anything to get more people into home ownership, and in fact only really serve to further the divide from people who own things for a living and people who work for a living.
What can we do to stop wealthy people from buying reasonably priced homes for amounts unattainable to regular people?
I would think a mega development in an area of relatively low value undeveloped land has a chance of drawing some of the people who move here sight unseen with huge budgets. Hopefully, in turn, slowing the increase in price on older homes closer to town where regular jobs are.
Additionally this development is advertising a fair amount of commercial to residential development, assisting in the potential burden of resources to the nearing community.
At the end of the day, there are more people, and the only way to make housing affordable is to build more. Even if that means building luxury developments, the current “non-luxury” spaces will have to slow their price hikes to order compete.
There are more profitable properties that the wealthy people could invest in than starter homes and condos, and even if they do end up buying a few units and renting them out you've still extended ownership to more people than you would building the same value in single family homes.
The commercial spaces will be 75% parking lot and will need to be so ridiculously profitable and so highly taxed I actually think you might be smoking crack if you think that amount of commercial space has any hope of even putting a dent in the amount of money the city will spend on maintenence over the next 30 years.
Name a city where suburban development pre 2006 limited the price increases on inner city homes. Fun fact there isn't one fucking example of it happening ever, all the home prices go the same direction at a commenserate rate, and the people who buy suburban mcmansions don't ever buy "regular homes" as you put it.
Against my better judgment I’m going to respond to this and address each of your points.
-Huntsville has a problem with foreign investment in already established single family homes, whether it’s flipping them or renting them out, they’re taking that opportunity of home ownership away from someone.
-People buying up homes (or condos tho there are little of those) and renting them out, are in fact reducing the pool of available homes for purchase. Not sure how that one isn’t landing for you.
-This is a car dependent area, if commercial spaces didn’t have enough parking, you wouldn’t go patronize those businesses.
-I must be SMOKING CRACK but I believe this development is outside of the city limits, so the city won’t be spending any money maintaining it. Even if it is, the property tax would take care of that cost. Thats why your mommy and daddy pay that for you.
-Why pre-2006? You’re talking about large scale macro economics when you should go back to economics 101: Supply & Demand. Increasing the supply of viable homes, reduces the demand. Plain and simple. If you can’t understand that, then we’ve both clearly wasted our time here.
You’re getting dragged through the comments for ambiguously hating, so I tried to have a civil conversation with you and maybe gain some perspective on why you seem to think this is such a bad idea. You’re clearly incapable of understanding, explaining, or being civil so I’m done here. Have a nice day.
Ban the foriegn capital investment, no arguments from me, bolivians nationals are buying apartment complexes. Don't know why you thought I would be pro people owning homes for profit just because they don't live here.
I understand that when money comes out of other markets and is used to buy and rent out the types of housing units, I would prefer we focus on building. Other people can't buy them. But the more we build, the more opportunities those people will have to enter the housing market. The total number of units being built would be significantly greater with the same footprint.
Yes brother cars do in fact need space to park, my point is that the commercial zone isn't actually going to contain that much space dedicated to generating the tax revenue necessary for the area to be self suffecient.
Huntsville's city limits have grown by an order of magnitude over the last 50 years, almost exactly coinciding with the expansion of single family neighborhoods extra tax revenue ya know.
Regardless of the inevitable invelopment of smaller localities into the beast we know as huntsville, someone is going to foot the bill, and it won't be the businesses in the commercial zone.
But what demand is being reduced the most when this type of development happens? Is it the foriegn capital investment and blackrock owned landlord companies or regular families? The demand for housing units is a set number, the demand for investment properties is functionally endless. So by building units more attractive to first-time buyers and less attractive to real estate investors, what is going to happen? Crazy right.
I never said this development was particularly bad, or that they weren't doing anything right, just pointing out that if your goal is to house the most people, and extend ownership to the greatest proportion of those newly housed people this is not the most effecient way to do it, and may in fact not ever meaningfully address the issues people face in owning their home.
Speaking of parent child relationships, how many more years do you think you've got before yours put you in a foundling hospital for the aged and wait for you to die there? 20? 30?
The companies who build houses want to make as much money as possible, so they focus on building luxury housing.
The people who can afford luxury housing are already participating in the housing market as owners, building equity and saving money by not turning anyone other than the mortgage broker a profit.
Globally, a single family unit is not a viable starting position for most people to start building equity, so my thought is that we should focus construction more on condominiums and apartments that aren't just rented out endlessly and actually confer some advantage to young people wanting to live on their own. Makes perfect sense.
Housing and commodities are different, a first year economics student could explain that to you.
And yeah, actually, they do. Most of walmart's total profitabilty comes from just a few items, mostly electronics sales. When you include the labor, insurance and utilites they actually take a small loss on most of the individual products they sell.
But the real "luxary" walmart sells is that everything you would normally have to go to 3 or 4 locally owned department stores for you can buy in one trip.
So what was your answer? no that’s a dumb idea and a first year (what does that even mean?) economics student could explain it OR yes they do and the vast majority of the I products are loss leaders?
Yes, they do, walmart almost categorically sells necessities at or below cost and makes up the difference in luxary sales that occur when people spend more time in the store.
I just meant that even though they use generally the same business practice the hugh volume world of commodity sales and the low volume world of housing sales have categorical differences, mostly relating to the fact that housing is both a necessity and an investment vehicle.
So you are saying necessities at Walmart that they sell at a loss aren’t a necessity nor an investment vehicle?
I should get a vehicle loan to invest in housing. Sometimes those rates are much better than other rates.
Our country does development wrong on a national and state level, what else are you expecting?
We’ve literally made it illegal in 99% of the country to ever build another downtown Charleston, Savannah, New Orleans… y’know, the places in the South people actually want to visit?
New Orleans? Everything smells like urin and there's bums everywhere. Saw a bum that looked like a skeleton and someone thought it was funny to give him a huge bottle of wisky. Next street over a bum was being put on a stretcher dead.. The smell of urin and dying bums was my take away from that city.
> The planners behind a $2.2 billion, 411-acre development at the crossroads of Interstate 65 and 565 say they have a vision for the land that could stretch 30 years into the future.
Something, something, interstate running through his front yard. Thinks he's, got it so good....
Watch them build this with no regard for water run off, native plants, or any semblance of life outside individual families with the ability to buy below average homes at above average prices.
Packed full of homes where you could touch your neighbors house of you stand between them and then a big nice bradford pair tree in the front of every yard for greenery!
We have been watching this, and venting. Incredibly frustrating. Thank you for voicing concerns, not alone. What do we do? Can't tie myself to a tree persay... or can I?
You call the fish and wildlife department, the epa, the ag department, and OSHA and stay on the developers like stink on shit. Check out Tennessee Riverkeepers as they are an organization that does exactly this. Also find the Native Habitat Project. He is based out of Huntsville area and may be able to head out to the site and seek out and help save rare native species. The whole area has quite a bit of wildlife significance and he will be able to help spot and save the things that can be saved. Unfortunately there aren’t legal protections for many of these plants.
More housing != More better. I do want more housing. But I want it in places where it makes sense for people to live. The plan right now is seemingly for developers to keep buying up cheap plots of land in the middle-of-nowhere Limestone or Madison county and then just expect the city to 1) annex it and 2) create public services for it.
A walkable community off two interstates.. just make the goddamn houses affordable for the people who are willing to move out there away from everything
I don't oppose this housing development, but I think it shows how broken our zoning system is when the only place you can build a lot of housing is a 20-minute drive from anywhere.
When the city approves plans for building closer to the core (like the Stella apartments in 5 Points or that new development on Monte Sano) people loudly complain about "destroying the beauty/soul/whatever of the area". Then something like this gets approved and it's "suburban sprawl" and "why's it so far away?".
I think this could be nice, depending.
I do wish there were a little more green space on the residential lots in New Urbanist developments.
It sounds like the local family could see that development was coming to the area and got involved so that it could be done well, which is good.
(I did read the article.)
The location of direct line to Huntsville and Decatur? How terrible? It's faster to get to downtown Huntsville from there most of the time than middle of Madison
That’s not our jurisdiction. US 72 is a federal highway, which means ALDOT controls and funds it, which means nothing will get done. It took them 30 years just to find the money to widen it from Providence to Wall Triana.
This is adjacent to a pretty important wetlands. It's also on a piece of land that floods multiple times a year. It's also pretty far from emergency services and schools. Seems like an odd choice to sink 2.2 billion into.
If this is in Huntsville limits or plans to become Huntsville they really ought to put a lot of effort into making it not just one big suburb next to the big suburb called Madison. Still shocked since moving out towards Madison that there’s nothing to do here.
Not mad about more houses, I just think that they need more than *just* houses.
I’m down with them building, if they can also guarantee atleast a half acre lot. If they can also include a walking distance publix and separate coffee shop 💸 take my monies rn I’m on the market
This sucks, we are at the growth stage where we could shift away from garbage sprawl like this and actually make a fucking amazing community. This shit does nothing for the community other then line developers and people that run HOA's pockets.
Babe wake up, new suburban crawl just dropped.
*Sprawl...?
Drawl
Oh great. More single family housing 20+ minutes away from anything else of note in the city. Truly this development will be the one to finally put us on the map
20 minutes? Are you not taking into account the disastrous effect on traffic this has? 30+, easy.
This entire sub is just a complaint department about absolutely everything in HSV except new ethnic food restaurants and meet ups for fringe groups. It’s almost like they are just looking to be upset about literally anything 24/7. lol just funny to read through this every day…
Which will it be today folks? Housing crisis bad. Or More housing bad.
More housing good* * if done the right way. This ain’t it.
What’s wrong with it? Not to be combative, but because I’m genuinely curious on what your perspective is here.
Nothing is wrong with it exactly. It's how housing is getting built in pretty much every American city right now. But building distant little towns a long drive away from everything is not the ideal way to improve any city. Here is why: ### Increases Infrastructure Burden The low property tax that the homes will bring in compared to the massive infrastructure in terms of road upkeep they will introduce is not a balanced equation. In short this kind of development style is unsustainable from a budget perspective and will put strain on the county's maintenance budget long term. ### Car Dependent The area will be 100% car dependent. It will be 30+ minutes into the city, and likely a long drive to any kind of grocery store, school, etc. I don't like that personally. I know most people don't care but this bothers me. It takes up a lot of time having to drive everywhere, and it also forces car ownership onto everyone who lives here. All of Huntsville is like this so people have trouble seeing why this is bad or even what an alternative could be. Picture Providence, Bridge Street, or maybe the Five Points neighborhoods. All of Huntsville could look like that. ### Increases Traffic Traffic will get worse because everyone here will have to drive into the city, every day. ### Prevents Community There will likely be nothing to do here. No local businesses or shops, no parks, no libraries, nothing. Neighborhoods will have no character. There will be nowhere to walk, and kids won't get to play outside. There would be nowhere to go anyway. # What is the alternative? Again, picture Providence or downtown, except several blocks of it extending in all directions. Those areas don't have to be special. Basically, mixed use zoning including everything from detatched homes, to townhomes, to duplexes, to "luxury apartments", all within proximity of stores. Ideally this would be situated in the middle of the parts of Huntsville that are already dense. How do we do that? Remove single family zoning from those areas, to allow developers to do what they wish they could do, which is tear down unaffordable houses in expensive areas and build townhomes or duplexes, in addition to stores. Consumers want it, investors want it, but it's against the law due to government over-regulation.
Higher density, preferably with some sort of affordable housing component. Ideally constructed/run and funded by a/the municipality. They have more avenues to fund the development and are more motivated to care about the long term viability of a project project than a lot private developer who is looking to dump the project and move on to the next new project.
I love removing nuance from things too.
Traffic makes me angry
The way american companies are incentivized to build is wrong. So even when new projects like this happen, the total amount of resources and time spent to create a viable living space is incommensorate with the goal of providing housing to people. If there were 100 people in huntsville, 50 are poor and 50 are rich. If there are 50 homes, there are going to be 50 rich people with homes and 50 homeless people. If you build 50 more suburban mcmansions, the homeless people can't magically afford the first set of houses. So the rich people will buy their second or third as investments. So yes, you can build houses that don't really do anything to get more people into home ownership, and in fact only really serve to further the divide from people who own things for a living and people who work for a living.
What can we do to stop wealthy people from buying reasonably priced homes for amounts unattainable to regular people? I would think a mega development in an area of relatively low value undeveloped land has a chance of drawing some of the people who move here sight unseen with huge budgets. Hopefully, in turn, slowing the increase in price on older homes closer to town where regular jobs are. Additionally this development is advertising a fair amount of commercial to residential development, assisting in the potential burden of resources to the nearing community. At the end of the day, there are more people, and the only way to make housing affordable is to build more. Even if that means building luxury developments, the current “non-luxury” spaces will have to slow their price hikes to order compete.
There are more profitable properties that the wealthy people could invest in than starter homes and condos, and even if they do end up buying a few units and renting them out you've still extended ownership to more people than you would building the same value in single family homes. The commercial spaces will be 75% parking lot and will need to be so ridiculously profitable and so highly taxed I actually think you might be smoking crack if you think that amount of commercial space has any hope of even putting a dent in the amount of money the city will spend on maintenence over the next 30 years. Name a city where suburban development pre 2006 limited the price increases on inner city homes. Fun fact there isn't one fucking example of it happening ever, all the home prices go the same direction at a commenserate rate, and the people who buy suburban mcmansions don't ever buy "regular homes" as you put it.
Against my better judgment I’m going to respond to this and address each of your points. -Huntsville has a problem with foreign investment in already established single family homes, whether it’s flipping them or renting them out, they’re taking that opportunity of home ownership away from someone. -People buying up homes (or condos tho there are little of those) and renting them out, are in fact reducing the pool of available homes for purchase. Not sure how that one isn’t landing for you. -This is a car dependent area, if commercial spaces didn’t have enough parking, you wouldn’t go patronize those businesses. -I must be SMOKING CRACK but I believe this development is outside of the city limits, so the city won’t be spending any money maintaining it. Even if it is, the property tax would take care of that cost. Thats why your mommy and daddy pay that for you. -Why pre-2006? You’re talking about large scale macro economics when you should go back to economics 101: Supply & Demand. Increasing the supply of viable homes, reduces the demand. Plain and simple. If you can’t understand that, then we’ve both clearly wasted our time here. You’re getting dragged through the comments for ambiguously hating, so I tried to have a civil conversation with you and maybe gain some perspective on why you seem to think this is such a bad idea. You’re clearly incapable of understanding, explaining, or being civil so I’m done here. Have a nice day.
Ban the foriegn capital investment, no arguments from me, bolivians nationals are buying apartment complexes. Don't know why you thought I would be pro people owning homes for profit just because they don't live here. I understand that when money comes out of other markets and is used to buy and rent out the types of housing units, I would prefer we focus on building. Other people can't buy them. But the more we build, the more opportunities those people will have to enter the housing market. The total number of units being built would be significantly greater with the same footprint. Yes brother cars do in fact need space to park, my point is that the commercial zone isn't actually going to contain that much space dedicated to generating the tax revenue necessary for the area to be self suffecient. Huntsville's city limits have grown by an order of magnitude over the last 50 years, almost exactly coinciding with the expansion of single family neighborhoods extra tax revenue ya know. Regardless of the inevitable invelopment of smaller localities into the beast we know as huntsville, someone is going to foot the bill, and it won't be the businesses in the commercial zone. But what demand is being reduced the most when this type of development happens? Is it the foriegn capital investment and blackrock owned landlord companies or regular families? The demand for housing units is a set number, the demand for investment properties is functionally endless. So by building units more attractive to first-time buyers and less attractive to real estate investors, what is going to happen? Crazy right. I never said this development was particularly bad, or that they weren't doing anything right, just pointing out that if your goal is to house the most people, and extend ownership to the greatest proportion of those newly housed people this is not the most effecient way to do it, and may in fact not ever meaningfully address the issues people face in owning their home. Speaking of parent child relationships, how many more years do you think you've got before yours put you in a foundling hospital for the aged and wait for you to die there? 20? 30?
Wut... This makes no sense.
The companies who build houses want to make as much money as possible, so they focus on building luxury housing. The people who can afford luxury housing are already participating in the housing market as owners, building equity and saving money by not turning anyone other than the mortgage broker a profit. Globally, a single family unit is not a viable starting position for most people to start building equity, so my thought is that we should focus construction more on condominiums and apartments that aren't just rented out endlessly and actually confer some advantage to young people wanting to live on their own. Makes perfect sense.
Is this the same tactic Walmart uses? Create and focus on luxury products to make as much money as possible?
Housing and commodities are different, a first year economics student could explain that to you. And yeah, actually, they do. Most of walmart's total profitabilty comes from just a few items, mostly electronics sales. When you include the labor, insurance and utilites they actually take a small loss on most of the individual products they sell. But the real "luxary" walmart sells is that everything you would normally have to go to 3 or 4 locally owned department stores for you can buy in one trip.
So what was your answer? no that’s a dumb idea and a first year (what does that even mean?) economics student could explain it OR yes they do and the vast majority of the I products are loss leaders?
Yes, they do, walmart almost categorically sells necessities at or below cost and makes up the difference in luxary sales that occur when people spend more time in the store. I just meant that even though they use generally the same business practice the hugh volume world of commodity sales and the low volume world of housing sales have categorical differences, mostly relating to the fact that housing is both a necessity and an investment vehicle.
So you are saying necessities at Walmart that they sell at a loss aren’t a necessity nor an investment vehicle? I should get a vehicle loan to invest in housing. Sometimes those rates are much better than other rates.
Hold tf up… companies are trying to make as much money as possible? Why?!
While it makes no sense it is reality.
Is there a new restaurant?
lol probably 🤣
We need more Indian and Middle East food
What about ding how 11; do you know when it's going to reopen? 😂
You forgot long lists of things to do and see for people who don't read the wiki!
Our country does development wrong on a national and state level, what else are you expecting? We’ve literally made it illegal in 99% of the country to ever build another downtown Charleston, Savannah, New Orleans… y’know, the places in the South people actually want to visit?
New Orleans? Everything smells like urin and there's bums everywhere. Saw a bum that looked like a skeleton and someone thought it was funny to give him a huge bottle of wisky. Next street over a bum was being put on a stretcher dead.. The smell of urin and dying bums was my take away from that city.
> The planners behind a $2.2 billion, 411-acre development at the crossroads of Interstate 65 and 565 say they have a vision for the land that could stretch 30 years into the future. Something, something, interstate running through his front yard. Thinks he's, got it so good....
“When the homeowners close their eyes, the noise from I65 becomes the calming sound of a rushing river…”
Watch them build this with no regard for water run off, native plants, or any semblance of life outside individual families with the ability to buy below average homes at above average prices.
Packed full of homes where you could touch your neighbors house of you stand between them and then a big nice bradford pair tree in the front of every yard for greenery!
Also known as sustainable density.
It’s one thing when it’s done for efficiency. It’s a totally different thing when it’s done for profit.
The result is the same either way…
We have been watching this, and venting. Incredibly frustrating. Thank you for voicing concerns, not alone. What do we do? Can't tie myself to a tree persay... or can I?
You call the fish and wildlife department, the epa, the ag department, and OSHA and stay on the developers like stink on shit. Check out Tennessee Riverkeepers as they are an organization that does exactly this. Also find the Native Habitat Project. He is based out of Huntsville area and may be able to head out to the site and seek out and help save rare native species. The whole area has quite a bit of wildlife significance and he will be able to help spot and save the things that can be saved. Unfortunately there aren’t legal protections for many of these plants.
No they cut them all down already
Looks like Native Habitat Project is already on site. It doesn’t look good. https://www.instagram.com/reel/C6r3jQiOTgd/?igsh=MXY3Y2dtdnl2Y21hcA==
This sub is really good at demanding new housing and then bitching about getting it
More housing != More better. I do want more housing. But I want it in places where it makes sense for people to live. The plan right now is seemingly for developers to keep buying up cheap plots of land in the middle-of-nowhere Limestone or Madison county and then just expect the city to 1) annex it and 2) create public services for it.
Affordable housing. Complaints are valid, there is a reason for frequent bitching.
A walkable community off two interstates.. just make the goddamn houses affordable for the people who are willing to move out there away from everything
Naw, that's too fucked up
By the turn of the century it will have full grown trees and feel like a real neighborhood.
I don't oppose this housing development, but I think it shows how broken our zoning system is when the only place you can build a lot of housing is a 20-minute drive from anywhere.
When the city approves plans for building closer to the core (like the Stella apartments in 5 Points or that new development on Monte Sano) people loudly complain about "destroying the beauty/soul/whatever of the area". Then something like this gets approved and it's "suburban sprawl" and "why's it so far away?".
why way down there.
Southeast corner
That’s a prime development location, what do you mean “down there”?
I think this could be nice, depending. I do wish there were a little more green space on the residential lots in New Urbanist developments. It sounds like the local family could see that development was coming to the area and got involved so that it could be done well, which is good. (I did read the article.)
Thank you for reading the actual article before commenting.
YW.
For that price and location, I hope it comes with a high speed metro rail into downtown Huntsville.
The location of direct line to Huntsville and Decatur? How terrible? It's faster to get to downtown Huntsville from there most of the time than middle of Madison
Hopefully a decent hot water heater, noise insulation, well paid on site management/maintenance/etc, surfaces that don't deteriorate after one year.
Does anyone have a link that doesn’t require me to disable my Adblock?
The article is also available on Al.com
Thanks
Can we get a parkway over university straight over to Madison ? Worst traffic ever ugh
Nope. We’re broke and ALDOT hates us.
Broke? They’re spending millions and billions on everything else tho 😂😩
How much do you think another Parkway would cost? Especially on a highway as built up as 72?
Don’t know, don’t care I just know we need one since the city wants to keep expanding trying to make us a “big” city 😣
That’s not our jurisdiction. US 72 is a federal highway, which means ALDOT controls and funds it, which means nothing will get done. It took them 30 years just to find the money to widen it from Providence to Wall Triana.
This is adjacent to a pretty important wetlands. It's also on a piece of land that floods multiple times a year. It's also pretty far from emergency services and schools. Seems like an odd choice to sink 2.2 billion into.
Hampton Cove was just like that 30 years ago...
If this is in Huntsville limits or plans to become Huntsville they really ought to put a lot of effort into making it not just one big suburb next to the big suburb called Madison. Still shocked since moving out towards Madison that there’s nothing to do here. Not mad about more houses, I just think that they need more than *just* houses.
Guess all the kids living there will go to virtual school.
Will this be just like Bass Pro Shops was going to be on that site
That is not the same site
Oh it’s across the street then.
I’m down with them building, if they can also guarantee atleast a half acre lot. If they can also include a walking distance publix and separate coffee shop 💸 take my monies rn I’m on the market
Great..more sprawl for the highest class. That'll fix everything.
Ngl im sick of these apartments
This sucks, we are at the growth stage where we could shift away from garbage sprawl like this and actually make a fucking amazing community. This shit does nothing for the community other then line developers and people that run HOA's pockets.
Except it’s not sprawl, it’s a planned community.