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

61–70 of 80 posts

Re: McMansion Hell

#61

Post by rsynnott »

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?

> Does it affect the utility of the house?

They're generally very large and of low-quality construction, making them expensive to heat, cool, and maintain, for little upside. They're also generally kind of impractical; you end up with either way too many rooms, or impractically _big_ rooms.

There's an element of subjectivity to the aesthetics, obviously, but I don't think you'll find many people who'll see most of the examples on that site and go "that looks good actually".

Re: McMansion Hell

#62

Post by rsynnott »

markisus wrote: post #46
balaga01 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> 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.

General consensus on definition seems to be "very large house, not designed by an architect, cheap construction". So they are both expensive (because they're really, really big) but also, well, cheaper than something that big done properly.

On the 'elite upbringing' thing, well, ever seen photos of the interiors of Donald Trump's houses? An elite upbringing does not necessarily imply taste.

Re: McMansion Hell

#63

Post by ghaff »

tiahura wrote: post #30
jabroni_salad wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

McMansion is more than square footage, they are also a hodgepodge of impractical design features. Counterstops made of a material that stains, so many glass fixtures that keeping them dusted is somebody's entire job, weird roof shapes with so many seams that water ingress is a certainty, seemingly zero optimization for the sun since the owner can surely afford to brute force their hvac, etc. American Farmhouse and Ra…

Ranch is fine until 2 of of your 3 kids are teenagers.

You can certainly have expansive single floor houses--although I'm not sure they're "Ranch" at that point. In general, there is a tradeoff between allocating space for open public spaces and bedrooms. My old farmhouse has (now) a fairly open first floor plan but the four upstairs rooms are fairly small (about 10' x 12').

It's interesting if you look at some old opulent mansions in somewhere like Newport. The public rooms are opulent but even the non-servant rooms upstairs are fairly minimalist.

Re: McMansion Hell

#64

Post by ghaff »

JohnFen wrote: post #53
ghaff wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 disas…

Whenever I see houses cheek-to-jowl like that, I wonder "why not just get an apartment or condo?" Those houses seem to have most of the disadvantages of apartment/condo living without the advantages.

You almost certainly have more space in the detached house than in all but the most luxurious condo (albeit probably not as efficiently used). And there are probably other tradeoffs.

But I don't really disagree for a lot of situations, especially without kids. I've always tended to prefer moderately rural or urban and not so much in-between.

Re: McMansion Hell

#65

Post by rsynnott »

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...

> and your living room windows facing into their bed room windows.

That's a failure of architecture, too; it's entirely possible to build houses near each other without that happening.

(Mind you, in general architects are unlikely to be involved in these, particularly where they're one-offs/customised).

Re: McMansion Hell

#67

Post by ghaff »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #17
ragebol wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For when you have money but no taste. Or modesty perhaps

It's the Keynesian beauty contest - if the exterior or the layout conformed to someone's taste or use case the seller will exclude the group with different tastes. So the outcome is a mishmash that appeals badly to everyone. It's no accident that so many supermodels are from Brazil - the nation is a true melting pot of races, it attracted immigrants from everywhere. If you need a clotheshorse you go to rural Rio Gran…

Even if, for purposes of argument, you stipulate that there are families that would make effective use of a very large house, the design for a family with a lot of kids and/or an older parent living with them is going to look very different from that for a couple or small family that throws large parties on a regular basis.

Re: McMansion Hell

#68

Post by shaftway »

JohnFen wrote: post #53
ghaff wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 disas…

Whenever I see houses cheek-to-jowl like that, I wonder "why not just get an apartment or condo?" Those houses seem to have most of the disadvantages of apartment/condo living without the advantages.

I moved into my development before all of the houses were complete, and after about two years they started building a new set of houses that they described as "zipper" style. The houses are basically "L" shaped, but turned so that they nestle into each other. I have no idea how the property lines work because you can clearly see that the houses overlap, but the official lines are all straight. I guess easements.

Re: McMansion Hell

#69

Post by alkonaut »

rsynnott wrote: post #54
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…

So I think there are a few issues. First off, this sort of approach _is_ cheaper than using an architect. So if for some reason you really want a 6000sqft house this is absolutely the budget option (of course, you then end up with massive rooms that make little sense; also a lot of examples of those on the site). But also, some people just want what they want, no matter how absurd it might look to, well, basically ev…

But an architect is a way of saving money not the other way around. It’s (by comparison to the overall cost) not very expensive, and it can save costs by avoiding costly design mistakes. Also, after architecting a few homes and interiors they are already paid for, the developer can build any number of homes to amortize the costs.

Re: McMansion Hell

#70

Post by deeg »

ompogUe wrote: post #52

We live in a Queen Anne era house, 120 yrs old. Same idea of quirky mish-mash of styles, but they had less styles to choose from back then

That's an interesting point. I agree with the blog that McMansions are ugly but my neighborhood has multiple Queen Annes and I like those. In 100 years will people find McMansions charming?
Post reply on HN