McMansions 101: What Makes a McMansion Bad Architecture? (2015, foreclosure, income tax)

[GoodSchoolols]

What makes a house good? I used to hate cape cods, still do actually. Anyway, my first house was a 1920s sidehall colonial. OMG stained glass everywhere, chestnut wood, it was like living in a freaking church

Anyway, now I live in a crap cod. Many people are tearing down the crap cods for the McMansions. Good money to be made I guess. Millennials and Gen X love shiny appliances and stone counter tops. The Home Depot chandelier above that giant center window is just to die for I guess. Makes them feel classy I suppose.

[Ohiogirl81]

Excellent article, OP. McMansions are all fluff on the outside, and don't provide much substance on the inside. They're often placed on lots that are too small for their bulk. They're trimmed in similar fashions. They're usually beige.

Originally Posted by oldtrader

The thing is, what the author was showing, was their preference for North East U.S. homes. The type of home they envision, is not what most people in the country live in. Ranch style is all one story, and will have a front entry attached garage, and has been the choice of homes in much of the country since early 1900s. Spanish architecture popular in other areas, etc. What the author thinks all homes should look like, may be popular in certain areas of the country, but non existent in others.

Did you actually read the article? The author was doing nothing of the sort, but instead was comparing the balanced architecture of previous home styles with the chaotic jumble architecture of McMansions.

For someone with sooooo much "experience", I'm surprised anyone has to point that out to you.

McMansions are popular all over the country, not just in the "North East". Ranch homes may be popular, but not too many builders are building them these days. You need to get out more.

Our home is a 3,700 sq. ft. 4 level home, which is the only one like it in our area.

So then it's not a McMansion. What's your point?

The author must really hate homes designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. If you do not know who he is,

Apparently you don't, either, otherwise you'd know that Wright didn't build McMansions.

Originally Posted by tnff

I think that is key to a McMansion vs a well designed home. Elements that just don't work. Taken out of context and thrown on because, well, just because. Keystones over a plain, rectangular, vinyl window where structurally they don't belong. Angled bays right beside square bays such that one bay looks into the other in the same room. Rooms that are 10 feet square with 28 feet vaulted ceilings. Brick, stone, vinyl, stucco mixed almost at random. Basically take all the features from architectural magazines and stick them together like legos.

Good assessment, especially about the Legos. LOL. Some of the McMansions I've seen do indeed look like they've been put together by a 5-year-old.

Originally Posted by Dirt Grinder

I got me a McDoublewide and my neighbors are green with envy.

And I live in a McRowHouse! LOL

Originally Posted by oldtrader

What you are judging to be bad about large homes, is they do not meet your personnel preference.

Sorry, but I have no "personnel" to express preferences.

And where they are being placed out of character of the neighborhood, is happening in places there are no other choices to have a new home but to tear down one home and build a new home. This is not the owners first choice, but lack of available lots to build on in forces it to happen if you have a desire for a new home. But this is what has always happened for hundreds of years, as the next generation replaces the old with new. It is what is called urban renewal, and is considered revitalization of an area and necessary to keep an area vital and from going to complete decay. It is called gentrification and revitalizing a city to keep it from dying, and cities are proud that they are revitalizing and bringing younger families especially back from the suburbs. If an older city is not doing it, it is on the way to trouble all over the country.

There's always a choice. And equating urban renewal with tearing down a residential home and replacing it with something that is out of scale and out of harmony with its surroundings is fallacious, at best.

And yes, it usually is the owners' first choice, because most teardowns happen in neighborhoods that are older yet fashionable for whatever reason. These neighborhoods are not in need of gentrification, nor are they dying. The owners simply want to have their cake and eat it too, resulting in the destruction of many historic residential neighborhoods.

Note one requirement is the attached garage to be a ranch style home.

Wrong again! A ranch home is one story. Garages are not necessary for that determination.

And if you look at McMansions of any quality, you don't see things like vinyl windows. [snip]
They don't use vinyl siding on quality homes.

Wrong a third time!

In our more modest one

It's already been established that you do not live in a McMansion. McMansions aren't on 5 acres or are unlike any other home in the neighborhood.

You really don't know what a McMansion is, do you? LMAO ...

From being in the business, I know from first hand knowledge that people that own McMansions can afford to own them.

Say what??? I should hope so ...

Originally Posted by tnff

McMansion is not synonymous with large home. There are many well designed large homes. It is however synonymous with a large, poorly designed, essentially tract home trying to look prestigious. That's the key difference you seem to be missing.

Thank you.

[ZigZagBoom]

Good reply, ohio girl. I think the author of tumblr post would probably say that Frank Lloyd Wright's designs are the antithesis of the McMansion aesthetic.

the funny thing is that in 50-75 years, the neo-eclectic mcmansion housing stock will be "historic" and "desirable", just like any other architecture trend of the 19 and early 20th century. The numerous flaws indicated in this article will be seen as desirable and of unique character.

This is actually incorrect for a number of reasons. In fact it's really, really incorrect: there's a whole universe of varied counter-examples and counter arguments. First of all you'd have to assume that the economic policies and conditions which permitted the McMansion boom from the 1980s to the 2010s will go on forever...it is probably a flawed assumption. I didn't even know many people who live in them but even I casually know a family who barely survived the recession years in theirs, and another family that lost theirs, selling it while underwater. Secondly the design issues discussed in the tumblr will continue to be design issues that will turn off the sort of people who look for older housing stock. A lot of people who are buying McMansions are buying them because they are programmed to buy everything new, regardless. A relative of mine lives in a very tasteful new McMansion, as they go, and for example he would truly attach a kind of shame to buying a used car. He would never do it. When he was house shopping he and his wife said they wouldn't buy anything more than 2-3 years old! They stretched for their real dream, which was to "design their own house." - which of course really meant taking a pretty standard McMansion design and doing some minor customizations. But assuming those kind of people are still around in 50 years and still have the relative buying power they do now, what makes you think they will buy a 50 year old McMansion? (I, OTOH, have been able to afford one the last couple times I bought a car, but I considered the certified pre-owned ones a much better value.)
I could go on: a lot of older housing stock hasn't survived, period..the bigger they are, the more likely they fall. For example less than half of the pre-WWII, real mansions of Long Island have survived. That's in a place with a practically endless supply of the very wealthy to buy them...and even there it wasn't enough. When buyers have significant economic power, only the better examples are going to survive, well, being bought by someone with economic power. OTOH, middle class and working class housing stock lasts as long as the surrounding neighborhood lasts, because middle class people don't have the money to completely rebuild a place to their liking. So, the same will be true with McMansions. I've already seen this in some suburbs of DC, the older 70-80s McMansions of their era in McLean get torn down for something even more ostentatious looking with a fountain in front. There's no reason to think it will stop. Maybe in 50 years, I dunno, curved front houses with giant round windows trimmed with golf leaf paint will be the new "style" for ostentatious people. (to match your curved 3D 32K Vizio, 144" OLED TV LOL...maybe the entire front of the house will be a jumbotron)
Classy housing stock, whether Fallingwater or Old Westbury...was appealing when it was new to people who know classic design; those and similar places will always be appealing to people who know classic design. Bad design will always be bad design.

[ZigZagBoom]

I'd even go so far as to say there's an equivalent of the McMansion in the 1880 to 1930 period, and most of them are gone. These were the sort of places you see placed on the periphery of small towns throughout American but especially the south and midwest, often on a large lot off a highway. (This is excluding known wealthy areas along the coasts and places like Chicago's Lake Forest where the economic dynamics are different.) It was some guy who did well in that small town and wanted everyone to know it. So he build the biggest house in a small town. Nowadays you often drive by those places and they are either derelict or completely re-purposed. The one I can specifically remember is the place on Rt. 7 in Vienna, VA, that was for years the base of operations of a hauling company. So someone's proud showoff Queen Anne house of 1890 spent its last years surrounded by dump trucks and bulldozers LOL. I haven't been back there in years, for all I know it's gone now...NoVA is unrecognizable every time I'm back.

[rodentraiser]

Originally Posted by runswithscissors

You're seriously showing a doll house to conflate? And now you're "disliking" iconic historic architecture that isn't even anything close to today's Mcmansions?

You missed my point completely.

And no, that cottage makes my nose itch just looking at it.

So don't look at it then.

[Avalon08]

Originally Posted by oldtrader

And if you look at McMansions of any quality, you don't see things like vinyl windows. In our more modest one, the windows are Anderson with metal exterior to stand up to the rocky mountain weather, which is clad over wood on the inside. Windows work and look as good as they did 25 years ago. They don't use vinyl siding on quality homes.

I firmly believe from 40 years of experience being around the real estate business, that the only ones that really complain about big homes, and unique homes, are the people that cannot afford them.

After 40 years in the real estate business, you should know that your windows are Andersen, not Anderson.

Anyway, thanks to the OP for that wonderful article. In my mind, McMansions are anything larger than the 4-bedroom 2.5-bath Colonials with family room that were the executive homes of my youth. Upper-middle-class families raised 5, 6, 7 kids in those homes and they were perfectly fine. Going into the 90s, suddenly the average number of kids was down to 2.5 but the homes were doubling and tripling in size with a two-story foyer with massive chandelier, two-story family room with stone fireplace and windows galore (requiring more heat), and every kid had to have his/her own room PLUS their own bathroom. I remember one of the young successful executives in my company wondering why he needed such a massive home when his parents managed to raise four kids in a house with one bathroom. So yeah, to me they are an excessive waste of space.

At the same time, the type of architecture featured in the article came into vogue. Peaks upon peaks upon peaks. I knew I hated it, but I didn't know why -- until I read the article. I guess I need a more orderly, balanced style. All those unnecessary architectural elements are just too chaotic and cheesy for me. I cannot imagine that they will someday be a revered classic style.

[oldtrader]

What so many on this thread, only think of what has been in their own local area. Lets take a town I am very familiar with. A University city.

If you go around the city, you find homes like this one for sale.

715 14th St, Boulder, CO 80302 - Home For Sale and Real Estate Listing - realtor.com®

This home in appearance would fit into the hated McMansion category. However it is only 2,570 sq. ft. on an average lot and for the area where is is located.

People built this home, and did not follow the OP's link in design. It is different than the neighbors, and would be detested by many. Just think it was built in 1937 and clear back then people would want a different home design, and everyone did not want to look like every body else. That home was built nearly 80 years ago.

If you go to Single Family Houses for Sale in Boulder, CO Single-Family Real Estate - realtor.com®

you will find all types of homes of all ages. People did not all have the same idea of what design should have been. They broke all the design rules that some of you love. There are all size and shapes of homes you can think of.

Wrong again! A ranch home is one story. Garages are not necessary for that determination.

Wrong again back at you. There are many classifications for one story homes, and a ranch style home is just one of them. And yes, a ranch style home has to have a garage to be classified as a ranch style home.

Here is a listing, showing some of the types of one story homes. Note ranch style is easily defined, and note it has an a garage as part of the home. Note even Colonials can be one story, Side Hall, Bungalow, Shot Gun, and there are some that are not even mentioned that are one story, that are not Ranch Style Homes.

One could not be a Realtor till I finally retired, following 10 years previous of Furniture sales and interior decorating to not know home styles a little better than someone without the background to really know what a ranch style home is. Saying all ranch style homes are ranch style homes, shows you really do not understand home design and appreciate homes as many of the ones on this thread hate right along with you.

It is very apparent to many people, that if they don't like the looks of a new large home built in their area, it is instantly one of those dreaded McMansions, even though a lot of people are envious of it, and the owners will love it. The big reason that people hate a tear down and a large home being built so that a person can live in that neighborhood in a home they love, is they feel their home is suddenly less desirable and they hate this and feel it drives the price of their home down. What they do not realize, is the value of the home next door that is well maintained will actually increase. The one that is hurt on resale, is the new big home, as it is overbuilt for the area. The most valuable home, is the lower priced homes in a nice neighborhood of nice homes if it is well maintained and has good curb appeal. People will pay a higher price for the home that cannot afford the biggest homes, just to live in the neighborhood.

[kokonutty]

Actually, while neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the overall content of the piece, I find it odd the writer is not identified by name or qualifications.

[rugrats2001]

Originally Posted by city living

I don't think that people who do not like them are analyzing the architecture like the original blog. To think that everyone is subconsciously doing so is not something I believe.

But I tend to think it is more like what I quoted. I think when most people picture real mansions, they are very customized with high-end everything and imports. People who build mansions in my area are building highly individualized, custom places. When you see these "McMansions," they are usually copies of each other. They are "custom" in the way a builder who is making a new development gives buyers the option to "customize" which is really just a list of things to choose from usually. Very little individuality.

Of course they don't have much individuality. In the old days wealthy people hired architects to design an estate that they felt would be part of the family 'forever'. Today's families build with the idea that they will live there 5-20 years and then sell. I live in a 25 year old development where less than 20% of the residents are the original owners, and many houses have been sold 3-5 times in that period.

[Ohiogirl81]

Originally Posted by oldtrader

This home in appearance would fit into the hated McMansion category. However it is only 2,570 sq. ft. on an average lot and for the area where is is located.

People built this home, and did not follow the OP's link in design. It is different than the neighbors, and would be detested by many. Just think it was built in 1937 and clear back then people would want a different home design, and everyone did not want to look like every body else. That home was built nearly 80 years ago.

LOL, you just keep digging yourself in deeper. You really do not know what makes a McMansion, do you?

Pop open your link and compare it with the photos in the OP's link. Educate yourself.

Saying all ranch style homes are ranch style homes, shows you really do not understand home design and appreciate homes as many of the ones on this thread hate right along with you.

If only this sentence was in English ...

In my mom's neighborhood of ranch houses, there are two homes that ar.e otherwise identical, except that one has an attached garage and one does not; the owner of the garage-less house opted to save a little money when the house was built in the mid-50s.

So if the one with the garage is a ranch, the one without the garage is ... ?