The McMansion is Back - The Recovery Is Super-Sizing Houses (Decatur: new house, living)

[bu2]

Originally Posted by JPD

Mc = McDonalds

Mansion = Mansion.

So, let's put it together:

McMansion = Large houses that are like McDonalds: cheaply built, ubiquitous, all basically the same.

I think the word is quite suitable.

I think the idea was mass produced. So you had a bunch of similar large houses built in a subdivision in the suburbs.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by cqholt

A single image captures how the American house has changed over 400 years - The Washington Post

Looks like they missed the brick cottage that was so popular in the 30s and 40s (see Virginia Highlands).

[bu2]

The reality is that the large houses built close in are well built. At that price range, you can't cut too many corners. The larger houses in the suburbs take some cheaper steps like windows that aren't as nice.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by JPD

Plus, a lot of people don't really like their families very much and are happy to see them as little as possible.

I don't know how common it is but I can think of several occassions when I would have gladly relocated to avoid certain family members.

[hautemomma]

Originally Posted by bu2

The reality is that the large houses built close in are well built. At that price range, you can't cut too many corners. The larger houses in the suburbs take some cheaper steps like windows that aren't as nice.

What about when they are built by the very same builders? Or, as in your example, windows produced by the same manufacturer?

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by bu2

The reality is that the large houses built close in are well built. At that price range, you can't cut too many corners. The larger houses in the suburbs take some cheaper steps like windows that aren't as nice.

I have a wll built house in the burbs....

[Dkeating]

Originally Posted by LovelySummer

It's kind of off, I think, to try to exchange a Victorian like this in Inman with a home out in the suburbs. They don't usually cost nearly the same amount for the same square footage, for example. Homes out in the suburbs tend to be much more affordable so it's not really an either or decision. Most simply are priced out of what they'd like to live in intown so they go to the suburbs. That is not a pick at suburbanites, it's just saying what's up with these arguments that make it seem like one can just choose a Victorian in Inman or a "McMansion" out in the suburbs as if the price is comparable. It's just not generally.

That's true, intown homes can't compete with suburban homes on square footage. I just meant that, for those people who can afford a $800K house, I think the historic intown home is a better investment.

[aries4118]

You can never have too many bathrooms, too many closets, or too many big closets.

[Dkeating]

Originally Posted by Tarzanman

Heh. I don't want to hijack the thread, but there are compelling reasons for wanting to live out in the suburbs. Pace of life, crime, and lifestyle are chief among them. Some people find true value in the ability to:
1. have a large lot
2. Not hear city noise all times of the day
3. Not fight for parking
4. Not worry about leaving your laptop or SLR camera on the front seat of your unlocked car, or worry about your kid’s bike being out on the front lawn (though the HOA might fine you for that one :-) )
It would be tough to find all of these things in the city proper

No doubt. I just think that, long term, a nice house intown is a better investment if you can afford it.

[Dkeating]

Originally Posted by LovelySummer

You won't get very far with 800K in Druid Hills. Gotta add at least another 200-300K to that in Druid Hills. That's why. John's Creek is just much less expensive.

You can't get Miss Daisy's house but there are still some nice houses in that price range