Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

McMansion Hell

mcmansionhell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 80 posts

Re: McMansion Hell

#41

Post by kevinmchugh »

alkonaut wrote: post #25

Who builds these things and why is BOTH the architecture and workmanship so shoddy? Who opted for this instead of making a well-architected and well built home 2/3rds the size (All you save in fake columns and moldings probably gets you some area back). Where I live, a new home is always built by the first owner. That is, the first owner together with the architect creates the home including every plan, every materia…

My understanding (from reading this blog) is that the companies that build these homes don't have architects, or don't prioritize their work. They're building large houses for customers who prioritize having more house for less money and don't care/can't identify quality work or materials.

Re: McMansion Hell

#42

Post by kelp »

Swizec wrote: post #12
boredumb wrote: post #11

I like the terriblerealestateagentphotos.com post from earlier, but this feels like a parody of that. So far all of these places i'd be besides myself to be living in.

> all of these places i'd be besides myself to be living in I think that’s the problem. All these places look purpose built to project wealth and abundance, but they don’t look nice to actually use. None of those rooms feel very welcoming or even remotely practical. And somehow even the largest rooms manage to feel cramped because there’s too much going on. You just can’t feel at ease in a place like that. Or at leas…

Yeah, Hearst castle is one of the most ugly and uncomfortable buildings I've ever been in. It's like the ultimate example of absolutely no restraint or constraints, without thought for actual usability.

Re: McMansion Hell

#43

Post by xnx »

alkonaut wrote: post #25

Who builds these things and why is BOTH the architecture and workmanship so shoddy? Who opted for this instead of making a well-architected and well built home 2/3rds the size (All you save in fake columns and moldings probably gets you some area back). Where I live, a new home is always built by the first owner. That is, the first owner together with the architect creates the home including every plan, every materia…

> Who builds these things and why is BOTH the architecture and workmanship so shoddy?

They are the direct result of having more money than taste. If they like it, who am I to criticize?

Re: McMansion Hell

#44

Post by martythemaniak »

bearjaws wrote: post #20

I think this is the architects idea of McMansion hell. My idea of McMansion hell is how closely they build them together AND the placement of them. For example, many of the big communities built here in Central Florida have your living room facing the ACs of your neighbors unit, and your living room windows facing into their bed room windows. If your homes are less than 8ft apart, JUST BUILD TOWN HOMES...

I agree that the aesthetics of large houses on small lots is bad, but it is more practical, which is why they get built and snapped up. Land is expensive, and whether in Florida where it's hot, or in Canada where it's cold, you get far more use out of enclosed climate-controlled space than a yard which gets occasional use. And with a detached house you don't have condo fees, have less noise, etc.

Re: McMansion Hell

#45

Post by munchler »

markisus wrote: post #28

I’m not sure there is anything objectively bad about these designs. Does it affect the utility of the house? Or is there some inherent ugliness that comes with affordable and popular things?

I think a lot of these bloated houses are extremely impractical to actually live in. For example, I live across the street from a McMansion that I fondly call “The Hotel”. It has an ornate front entrance on the main street that the owners never use. It might as well be sealed shut. Instead, they enter and exit through the basement garage, or by walking down a rickety set of stairs from their kitchen to the side street where several of their many cars are kept. Watch out for the boat parked in the driveway!

Re: McMansion Hell

#46

Post by markisus »

balaga01 wrote: post #38
markisus wrote: post #28

I’m not sure there is anything objectively bad about these designs. Does it affect the utility of the house? Or is there some inherent ugliness that comes with affordable and popular things?

> Or is there some inherent ugliness that comes with affordable and popular things? I would question both of these adjectives, where I live, "affordable" is sub-400'000 USD and "popular" is a 3-bedroom terraced house. I would use expensive and extravagant instead.

I realize that calling any type of mansion affordable seems out of touch. I was commenting on the relative expense of some of these design components. The prefix “Mc” evokes McDonald’s. The post pokes fun at a statue of a maid, because the owners could not afford to hire true maids. From the site, I assume that a McMansion is like a mansion, but made with cheaper components and without the taste and class that comes with an elite upbringing.

Re: McMansion Hell

#47

Post by sidewndr46 »

I always find these critiques so out of place. Yes, many large houses have weird architectural elements that basically consist of "we copied bits and pieces of historically significant works of architecture". But I've also seen numerous houses that didn't do this, which I often describe as the "assembly hall". It is a house that has no distinguishing features at all. It looks like where you would go to a city council meeting and sit in benches. That's it.

I live in a tiny ~1000 sq. ft. home. Per sq. ft. it includes as many of these out of place design elements than a McMansion. Pointless columns, rooflines that come out of nowhere, trim that looks like someone took a set of prison bars for inspiration. Randomly added brick because the developer thought it would increase home value. Vents that are purely aesthetic. A window over the front door, so if you're 9 ft tall you can see the people outside without opening the door.

Re: McMansion Hell

#48

Post by DamonHD »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #47

I always find these critiques so out of place. Yes, many large houses have weird architectural elements that basically consist of "we copied bits and pieces of historically significant works of architecture". But I've also seen numerous houses that didn't do this, which I often describe as the "assembly hall". It is a house that has no distinguishing features at all. It looks like where you would go to a city council…

A lot of people would not call 1000sqft "tiny". It's a pretty standard-size UK family home. My family (4 of us) lives in ~800sqft.

When you start from this perspective you may realise that the size bloat is just overwhelming well before you get to the detailing. You may be standing too close to the wood to see the trees... %-P

Re: McMansion Hell

#49

Post by ghaff »

martythemaniak wrote: post #44
bearjaws wrote: post #20

I think this is the architects idea of McMansion hell. My idea of McMansion hell is how closely they build them together AND the placement of them. For example, many of the big communities built here in Central Florida have your living room facing the ACs of your neighbors unit, and your living room windows facing into their bed room windows. If your homes are less than 8ft apart, JUST BUILD TOWN HOMES...

I agree that the aesthetics of large houses on small lots is bad, but it is more practical, which is why they get built and snapped up. Land is expensive, and whether in Florida where it's hot, or in Canada where it's cold, you get far more use out of enclosed climate-controlled space than a yard which gets occasional use. And with a detached house you don't have condo fees, have less noise, etc.

I have a friend who lives in an older suburban neighborhood next to a McMansion development and she says basically the only people you ever see outside are the landscapers cutting the lawn etc. So, if you want a large house in a high cost of living area, there's a certain practicality in not paying for a couple acres of land just to be a bit better screened from your neighbors. The style is sort of an aesthetic disaster but it mostly doesn't affect the residents much.

Re: McMansion Hell

#50

Post by rsynnott »

throw0101a wrote: post #15

Probably a bunch of folks have not read Alexander's A Pattern Language : * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Pattern_Language I'm guessing most of the design elements were the clients' choices and not the architects' (or any architect or interior designer with some semblance of good taste).

> not the architects'

Bold to assume an architect was involved (many of the more ridiculous examples on the site are likely a result of no-architect build-to-order construction...)

Post reply on HN