$3.3 million in CCDC / Barnaby Woods

[Anonymous]

The listing says it was built in 1921. Thus being a flip. Though we know this developer has problems with the truth.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No shilling changes the fact that this is a flip, and a cheap one that should not have been listed.

No dog in this fight. That was not a “flip.” Way too many structural changes that took months, not weeks. And it was not cheap. Was it worth 3.3M? No. But those were not cheap fixtures, cabinets, finishes, etc.

How do you know if you have no dog in the fight? Lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The listing says it was built in 1921. Thus being a flip. Though we know this developer has problems with the truth.....

What? Nobody is confused about the timeline on the house.

The point is that the term “flip” was invented to describe a certain type of cosmetic renovations before the rapid resale of a house. It doesn’t describe a major renovation/expansion like this.

But I mean, whatever, I actually looked it up and the dictionary says:
“to buy and usually renovate (real estate) so as to quickly resell at a higher price”

So I guess it would depend on your definition of “quickly.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The listing says it was built in 1921. Thus being a flip. Though we know this developer has problems with the truth.....

What? Do you think every house that is renovated is a “flip”? “Flip” is a pejorative term to mean a house that was lightly and very quickly remodeled (ie generally within the original footprint of the home).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, this isn’t a “flip.” This is a major renovation/basically rebuilt. The old house is gone. I don’t like the house but that’s just not what “flip” means.

Same basic shape and size as the old house, though. Can any of the neighbors comment on how much is actually new?

No, it's not. The only thing they left standing was the left front wall of the house - to the left of the front door. Why they even bothered with that I have no idea.

[Anonymous]

Ah, now I see that they left one singular exterior wall to claim it was built in 1921. GMAFB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, this isn’t a “flip.” This is a major renovation/basically rebuilt. The old house is gone. I don’t like the house but that’s just not what “flip” means.

Same basic shape and size as the old house, though. Can any of the neighbors comment on how much is actually new?

No, it's not. The only thing they left standing was the left front wall of the house - to the left of the front door. Why they even bothered with that I have no idea.

That happens all the time so there are definitely reasons for it. Grandfathered setbacks maybe? Not sure.

[Anonymous]

For all essentials purposes this house was built in 2021. To claim it was built in 1921 is a total joke. The original house is gone, there may be part of one or two internal walls and part of a foundation, but that is it. 95% is new. Unfortunately, it will not stand the test of time and will be outdated by 2025. If they had a better design sense and aesthetic they could have renovated and blown out the original 100 year old home and/or created a better layout and more tasteful and timeless design with true longevity. Instead it’s a poorly designed “modern Tudor” fishbowl in the front and a modern box style retail store on the sides and back with a wannabe Kardashian black and white interior with “modern Tudor” wood accents and William Morris wallpaper. Totally schizophrenic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ah, now I see that they left one singular exterior wall to claim it was built in 1921. GMAFB.

I think you are confused about the whole situation here. Nobody wants to “claim” the house was built in 1921. I dunno why they do the renovations the way they do but obviously it’s not a secret that the house was rebuilt/expanded this year. It’s the main selling point. The history of the house is public record.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ah, now I see that they left one singular exterior wall to claim it was built in 1921. GMAFB.

I think you are confused about the whole situation here. Nobody wants to “claim” the house was built in 1921. I dunno why they do the renovations the way they do but obviously it’s not a secret that the house was rebuilt/expanded this year. It’s the main selling point. The history of the house is public record.

It was flipped

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ah, now I see that they left one singular exterior wall to claim it was built in 1921. GMAFB.

Kind of, yes. Leaving one wall up means they can call it a remodel and not a rebuild, which likely will keep the property taxes lower. And by calling it a remodel and not a rebuild, they can get around some laws that require entirely new houses to comply with updated building and environmental codes.

So basically, leaving one wall up saves the developer time and money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ah, now I see that they left one singular exterior wall to claim it was built in 1921. GMAFB.

I think you are confused about the whole situation here. Nobody wants to “claim” the house was built in 1921. I dunno why they do the renovations the way they do but obviously it’s not a secret that the house was rebuilt/expanded this year. It’s the main selling point. The history of the house is public record.

It was flipped

Clearly the developer is on this thread...you are ridiculous. It was not a flip. It was a tear down but for 10 linear feet of 1-story high masonry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ah, now I see that they left one singular exterior wall to claim it was built in 1921. GMAFB.

I think you are confused about the whole situation here. Nobody wants to “claim” the house was built in 1921. I dunno why they do the renovations the way they do but obviously it’s not a secret that the house was rebuilt/expanded this year. It’s the main selling point. The history of the house is public record.

I disagree, lots of people would prefer a renovated 1921 home to a new build, especially in a neighborhood like Chevy Chase/Barnaby Woods. For all intensive purposes this house is a new build. This appeals to some, but not all. Some people prefer real character, charm, understated elegance, and timeless taste to this odd mix of trendy styles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For all essentials purposes this house was built in 2021. To claim it was built in 1921 is a total joke. The original house is gone, there may be part of one or two internal walls and part of a foundation, but that is it. 95% is new. Unfortunately, it will not stand the test of time and will be outdated by 2025. If they had a better design sense and aesthetic they could have renovated and blown out the original 100 year old home and/or created a better layout and more tasteful and timeless design with true longevity. Instead it’s a poorly designed “modern Tudor” fishbowl in the front and a modern box style retail store on the sides and back with a wannabe Kardashian black and white interior with “modern Tudor” wood accents and William Morris wallpaper. Totally schizophrenic.

Most truthful take. Though I disagree slightly on the front facade — I think it actually looks ok, and the scale plays nicely with the neighboring structures (versus many of the newly built mccraftsmans with their incredibly tall tables to accommodate third stories). Everything else you said is 100%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all essentials purposes this house was built in 2021. To claim it was built in 1921 is a total joke. The original house is gone, there may be part of one or two internal walls and part of a foundation, but that is it. 95% is new. Unfortunately, it will not stand the test of time and will be outdated by 2025. If they had a better design sense and aesthetic they could have renovated and blown out the original 100 year old home and/or created a better layout and more tasteful and timeless design with true longevity. Instead it’s a poorly designed “modern Tudor” fishbowl in the front and a modern box style retail store on the sides and back with a wannabe Kardashian black and white interior with “modern Tudor” wood accents and William Morris wallpaper. Totally schizophrenic.

Most truthful take. Though I disagree slightly on the front facade — I think it actually looks ok, and the scale plays nicely with the neighboring structures (versus many of the newly built mccraftsmans with their incredibly tall tables to accommodate third stories). Everything else you said is 100%.

The front is better than the back, but it is not in scale with the houses on either side. This house is significantly taller and a big box down the sides and in rear.