Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I love architect designed modern houses. But the drawback of a flat roof is that a) it is likely to leak, and b) if it has any overhang it is likely to get ripped off in a hurricane. But I like the design of a house such as the OP showed, although only if it is one of a very few scattered throughout a neighborhood of eclectic houses.
Here is our modern house. I figure since it was completed in 2015, it can still be classified as modern. Now, if you want, I can describe the revolutionary features that should be included in new constructions.
In that case we need to define "modern". Your house, at least from the picture, does not strike me as modern, as in "modern design". To me, it seems to appear as a "rancher" home, like the ones built in the 1950s or 1960s. It is a new home, but not what I would call a "modern" home. When I think of modern I think of MOMA in NYC, and that type of style/art, extrapolated to architectural design. Anyone else?
I love architect designed modern houses. But the drawback of a flat roof is that a) it is likely to leak, and b) if it has any overhang it is likely to get ripped off in a hurricane. But I like the design of a house such as the OP showed, although only if it is one of a very few scattered throughout a neighborhood of eclectic houses.
We just moved into a lovely neighborhood with pre-war homes, in a great location. Every single one of them is a piece of art in my opinion. People buy them, and some decide to tear them down to put a brand new home on that lot. How is that even allowed??? Not on our street (thank God!!), but on other streets we see some of the "modern" homes that are an eye sore. It is a crime in my opinion to tear down these old beautiful homes, instead of restoring them. The newly built homes, modern or not, look horrific once they are not new any more. Look at homes that were built in the previous decade for example (not too long ago, right?) they are now ugly looking. Not to mention the "modern" ones, with all those angles that hurt your eyes, and where it would probably be difficult to get a good night sleep. To each their own, and I respect that, but not when it comes to including these modern looking homes in old neighborhoods that were built in the first part of the 1900s. They don't make those any more...
We just moved into a lovely neighborhood with pre-war homes, in a great location. Every single one of them is a piece of art in my opinion. People buy them, and some decide to tear them down to put a brand new home on that lot. How is that even allowed??? Not on our street (thank God!!), but on other streets we see some of the "modern" homes that are an eye sore. It is a crime in my opinion to tear down these old beautiful homes, instead of restoring them. The newly built homes, modern or not, look horrific once they are not new any more. Look at homes that were built in the previous decade for example (not too long ago, right?) they are now ugly looking. Not to mention the "modern" ones, with all those angles that hurt your eyes, and where it would probably be difficult to get a good night sleep. To each their own, and I respect that, but not when it comes to including these modern looking homes in old neighborhoods that were built in the first part of the 1900s. They don't make those any more...
Maybe people who buy old houses and then tear them down to build something new want to live in a good location, but do not want to live in a museum. New houses are often better suited to current lifestyles, without weird internal layouts, poor infrastructure, etc.
Just had a thought. The modern home the OP shows is one that is sort of related to the prairie aesthetic. I like those. I really don't care for the house sailor_lou showed, which I would call "rustic contemporary" (made up name) rather than modern. And those 50's and 60's ranches? Some are MCM, mid century modern and can be very light and airy.
We just moved into a lovely neighborhood with pre-war homes, in a great location. Every single one of them is a piece of art in my opinion. People buy them, and some decide to tear them down to put a brand new home on that lot. How is that even allowed??? Not on our street (thank God!!), but on other streets we see some of the "modern" homes that are an eye sore. It is a crime in my opinion to tear down these old beautiful homes, instead of restoring them. The newly built homes, modern or not, look horrific once they are not new any more. Look at homes that were built in the previous decade for example (not too long ago, right?) they are now ugly looking. Not to mention the "modern" ones, with all those angles that hurt your eyes, and where it would probably be difficult to get a good night sleep. To each their own, and I respect that, but not when it comes to including these modern looking homes in old neighborhoods that were built in the first part of the 1900s. They don't make those any more...
The problem with doing this is obvious to all but those who do it. Thing is, the houses that look so ugly when plopped down in an older neighborhood would perhaps look less so, even attractive, in a neighborhood where they fit. Any decent architect knows that you design a house of whatever vintage for its lot and surroundings, for that reason.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
