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.
The exception is if it's a historic area/themed area, that I consider a bad thing.
I think it's so cool when you're driving around a plain jane area and then this gigantic flashy fancy suburban house pops out of knowhere and makes you look at it. I think it's amazing when you as one homeowner can add so much niceness to a block.
If I become rich one day then I want to one day live in a McMansion in an average area. Most wealthy [suburban] areas have huge lots with very little tight-knitness&interaction; those type of areas are not my cup of tea.
[Don't know if this is the right forum but whatever..]
[Don't know if this is the right forum but whatever..]
LOL we'll see what happens on the responses. There's also bound to be a lengthy discussion of what actually qualifies as a "McMansion"
I'm not a fan of them, at all, for a number of reasons. In general I find fake wealth gaudy, and I consider bloated, cheaply-made tract homes on clear-cut (probably former agricultural) lots to be fake wealth.
However, sensible landscaping and tree cover can do WONDERS to conceal them, and the slightest bit of effort to reduce the gaudy factor brings my blood back down to a light simmer.
Yes, i have trouble seeing anything wrong with them.
They have this huge development about 10 miles east of Downtown Saint Paul with some very beautiful homes. Its called Stonemill Farms in Woodbury, MN
People keep buying them, so I suppose others like them. They can look OK; some of the ones around me are clearly imitations of actual mansions which are nearby. But a lot of them just have random architectural details from different styles glommed together, and that just looks bad. And since I don't have servants and am not raising octuplets, I don't really need that much space.
I'm not a fan of them, at all, for a number of reasons. In general I find fake wealth gaudy, and I consider bloated, cheaply-made tract homes on clear-cut (probably former agricultural) lots to be fake wealth.
I would much prefer a well-built, high end home at a reasonable size (2000 sq ft or less) over a McMansion tract home. I would also pick an older, remodeled home in an established neighborhood over a McMansion, as well. I don't want to clean 3500 square feet of space or heat/cool it. Also, I don't know what some of the architects were thinking when they designed some of these horribly gaudy homes. I mean seriously, what IS this?
Many of the older homes with similar square footage to McMansions are beautiful. I don't know what this new obsession is with wanting your home to look like a mansion...You are not rich and can't afford a mansion, trying to make your house look like one is not going to impress anyone!
This house is 3500 square feet, and looks like a normal home. It is at least 10x better than that first picture
A waste of time, space and money and most of them look tacky to me but I have a more simple yet elegant requirement when it comes to homes, vehicles, clothing, shoes and pretty much everything in my life. Much like the little black dress, always simple, elegant and a tried and true classic.
No, you're not the only one. Be aware that many folks who post away daily on various forums live a different lifestyle than those who do (prefer larger properties) and may not appreciate what others prefer...
If I become rich one day then I want to one day live in a McMansion in an average area. Most wealthy [suburban] areas have huge lots with very little tight-knitness&interaction; those type of areas are not my cup of tea.
No need; that's the point of the "mc". You can build a monolithic mcmansion far cheaper than a real mansion. You really only need to be a hundred-thousandaire.
Well someone must like them, otherwise no one would buy them!
Also, when you're living in Long island or Queens, McMansions are more of a novelty, there aren't that many very new homes.
The term is new, but what it describes is not. I don't realy know what LI looks like, but my impression is that it's got quite a few pre-McMansion McMansions. What I mean by that is Sac's Fab '40s is pre-McMansion McMansion. Term didn't exist yet, but what it described did. If you look around, you'll see many examples of "tacky" architecture that blends different styles together. You won't find many turrets. Turrets weren't fashionable then, but you'll find many pillars. Pillars look just as stupid to me. Pillars work on some buildings and turrets work on others. Turret on QA victorian? Fine. Turret on neoeclectic? Out of place.
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.
