Things I hate on homes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most families want 2 story entrances, 2 car garage, large master bedroom and at least 3000sqrft. i'd rather have a smaller lot, inside the beltway and a 2 car garage . In my mind I am so happy that i don't have to park my car in the street or driveyway especially when it is raining and snowing. I will take a big garage front over none anyday.

Me too. And the driveway is less to shovel that way. Parking on the street/no garage would be a deal breaker for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Driveways on expensive houses should be blacktop or pavers. Walkways should be brick, flagstone or pavers (not the concrete slabs that are usually used for mounting a/c units).....

Blacktop? I am happy to hear this. We have blacktop, and I always thought it was kind of down market for our house, but maybe not.

[Anonymous]

I really don't know why I visit these forums anymore. People get so mean and nasty.

That said, I think all of those real estate shows have made people so uber sensitive about 'design.' I blame them for the whole granite counter top craze.

The sad reality is that most of the stuff on those shows and on real estate threads and forums aren't practical. Granite countertops are actually a horrible idea for kitchens and bathrooms because they're porous and you can't bleach them. I'm not a bleach fiend, because it isn't so great for the environment, but when it comes to the kitchen and bathroom, I like to know I'm dealing with a clean surface. And with granite, you're really not.

The whole garage/parking debate is amusing. Some people say how much they love their old DC house with no parking, but then they park their cars on the street, cluttering up the street, which makes it harder for bikers, drivers, et cetera. And don't say you don't want people driving through. If you buy groceries, you *need* trucks to bring the groceries to your neighborhood store.

Why can't people just be honest and accepting? Like, yeah, those old D.C. homes have their charms but also downsides.

I think in the future, we would have better communities if we built houses for functionality and practicality instead of as social status symbols or to fulfill some BS "dream house" fantasy we have been force-fed by the real estate industry and HG TV.

While brick and stone look lovely, they're not the most practical building materials. And vinyl siding is actually very helpful in updating older houses because it enables you to put in extra insulation beneath the siding. And I do think that we should update older homes as much as possible so that we don't have to keep destroying green spaces to build more overpriced developments.

Personally, I think that in newer homes, bathrooms are way larger than they need be. I don't understand having a separate shower and bathtub because I doubt many -- if any -- people will bathe while someone else showers beside them... if for no other reason than the availability of hot water.

But I think so many people have been sort of brainwashed into thinking certain features are "classier" or better and it becomes some kind of status symbol.

and then it just gets ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Garage doors in the front are efficient use of space and easiest to drive in and out from requiring the least amount of space and turns. They are logical but not always aesthetically pleasing. I am an engineer

As a student of urban planning, I disagree with this view point because this comment about "efficiency" is devoid of the human and social context of homes. When garages, rather than welcoming front porches, assume the largest focal point of the front of the home, the emphasis is upon the car-dependent commute, and not upon the human interaction of homes on a street. (Historically, garages were only placed in the front of the home when suburbs exploded in the US in the 50s and 60s.) In older neighborhoods, garages were placed behind the home with the garage door facing an alley. Trash cans were picked up by garbage trucks in the back alley. Front facades of homes often had generous, sometimes covered, porches with seating areas and sidewalks to encourage interaction with neighbors.

Besides, talking about space efficiency is ridiculous when people believe that a family of 4 "needs" a home larger than 2000 sq ft.

The problem I have is that at least in this area, if the garage doors are not on the front of the house, they are on the side. And they do not do this for the reasons you list above. They do this to make the house appear larger because they end up putting windows along the garage side, which makes people think it's more house when it's actually just the garage. They are not replacing the front garage doors with a porch for everyone to hang out on. If anything, it encourages even LESS interaction with the neighbors because now instead of dad and the kids mucking around in the garage, playing basketball, riding bikes on the driveway in the front of the house, they are not on the side of the house, invisible to the neighbors. Unless the house has a front porch, no one is hanging out at the front of the house. In fact, with the side-load garage, the front door barely gets used at all by anyone.

What you describe is a return to the old neighborhoods built on grids where the garage is detached and in the back of the home and you enter via the alley. I have seen some new planned communities in other areas of the country that are going back to that in the suburbs, but on the whole, at least in this area, when garages are not facing the street, they are side-load and make the suburban existence that much more isolating.

Plus, I can't tell you how many homes I've seen with side-load garage stuffed on thin lots where the cars have to do a sharp 90 degree turn to get into the garage. Because of this, I never see those cars in the garage. They just keep them in the driveway because of how hard it is to make those turns to get in and out.

[Anonymous]

I hate when people call houses "homes". Soo affected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Garage doors in the front are efficient use of space and easiest to drive in and out from requiring the least amount of space and turns. They are logical but not always aesthetically pleasing. I am an engineer

As a student of urban planning, I disagree with this view point because this comment about "efficiency" is devoid of the human and social context of homes. When garages, rather than welcoming front porches, assume the largest focal point of the front of the home, the emphasis is upon the car-dependent commute, and not upon the human interaction of homes on a street. (Historically, garages were only placed in the front of the home when suburbs exploded in the US in the 50s and 60s.) In older neighborhoods, garages were placed behind the home with the garage door facing an alley. Trash cans were picked up by garbage trucks in the back alley. Front facades of homes often had generous, sometimes covered, porches with seating areas and sidewalks to encourage interaction with neighbors.

Besides, talking about space efficiency is ridiculous when people believe that a family of 4 "needs" a home larger than 2000 sq ft.

The problem I have is that at least in this area, if the garage doors are not on the front of the house, they are on the side. And they do not do this for the reasons you list above. They do this to make the house appear larger because they end up putting windowls along the garage side, which makes people think it's more house when it's actually just the garage. They are not replacing the front garage doors with a porch for everyone to hang out on. If anything, it encourages even LESS interaction with the neighbors because now instead of dad and the kids mucking around in the garage, playing basketball, riding bikes on the driveway in the front of the house, they are not on the side of the house, invisible to the neighbors. Unless the house has a front porch, no one is hanging out at the front of the house. In fact, with the side-load garage, the front door barely gets used at all by anyone.

What you describe is a return to the old neighborhoods built on grids where the garage is detached and in the back of the home and you enter via the alley. I have seen some new planned communities in other areas of the country that are going back to that in the suburbs, but on the whole, at least in this area, when garages are not facing the street, they are side-load and make the suburban existence that much more isolating.

Plus, I can't tell you how many homes I've seen with side-load garage stuffed on thin lots where the cars have to do a sharp 90 degree turn to get into the garage. Because of this, I never see those cars in the garage. They just keep them in the driveway because of how hard it is to make those turns to get in and out.

Several of you have problems, but garage placements only appear to scratch the surface.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Garage doors in the front are efficient use of space and easiest to drive in and out from requiring the least amount of space and turns. They are logical but not always aesthetically pleasing. I am an engineer

As a student of urban planning, I disagree with this view point because this comment about "efficiency" is devoid of the human and social context of homes. When garages, rather than welcoming front porches, assume the largest focal point of the front of the home, the emphasis is upon the car-dependent commute, and not upon the human interaction of homes on a street. (Historically, garages were only placed in the front of the home when suburbs exploded in the US in the 50s and 60s.) In older neighborhoods, garages were placed behind the home with the garage door facing an alley. Trash cans were picked up by garbage trucks in the back alley. Front facades of homes often had generous, sometimes covered, porches with seating areas and sidewalks to encourage interaction with neighbors.

Besides, talking about space efficiency is ridiculous when people believe that a family of 4 "needs" a home larger than 2000 sq ft.

The problem I have is that at least in this area, if the garage doors are not on the front of the house, they are on the side. And they do not do this for the reasons you list above. They do this to make the house appear larger because they end up putting windows along the garage side, which makes people think it's more house when it's actually just the garage. They are not replacing the front garage doors with a porch for everyone to hang out on. If anything, it encourages even LESS interaction with the neighbors because now instead of dad and the kids mucking around in the garage, playing basketball, riding bikes on the driveway in the front of the house, they are not on the side of the house, invisible to the neighbors. Unless the house has a front porch, no one is hanging out at the front of the house. In fact, with the side-load garage, the front door barely gets used at all by anyone.

What you describe is a return to the old neighborhoods built on grids where the garage is detached and in the back of the home and you enter via the alley. I have seen some new planned communities in other areas of the country that are going back to that in the suburbs, but on the whole, at least in this area, when garages are not facing the street, they are side-load and make the suburban existence that much more isolating.

Plus, I can't tell you how many homes I've seen with side-load garage stuffed on thin lots where the cars have to do a sharp 90 degree turn to get into the garage. Because of this, I never see those cars in the garage. They just keep them in the driveway because of how hard it is to make those turns to get in and out.

+1. Plus, if the developer arranges the lots so that the garages are on the side, there's going to be that much more physical distance between the houses, making the neighborhood more sprawl-y. I know my house would look prettier with a side garage, but I don't think I would want one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really don't know why I visit these forums anymore. People get so mean and nasty.

That said, I think all of those real estate shows have made people so uber sensitive about 'design.' I blame them for the whole granite counter top craze.

The sad reality is that most of the stuff on those shows and on real estate threads and forums aren't practical. Granite countertops are actually a horrible idea for kitchens and bathrooms because they're porous and you can't bleach them. I'm not a bleach fiend, because it isn't so great for the environment, but when it comes to the kitchen and bathroom, I like to know I'm dealing with a clean surface. And with granite, you're really not.

The whole garage/parking debate is amusing. Some people say how much they love their old DC house with no parking, but then they park their cars on the street, cluttering up the street, which makes it harder for bikers, drivers, et cetera. And don't say you don't want people driving through. If you buy groceries, you *need* trucks to bring the groceries to your neighborhood store.

Why can't people just be honest and accepting? Like, yeah, those old D.C. homes have their charms but also downsides.

I think in the future, we would have better communities if we built houses for functionality and practicality instead of as social status symbols or to fulfill some BS "dream house" fantasy we have been force-fed by the real estate industry and HG TV.

While brick and stone look lovely, they're not the most practical building materials. And vinyl siding is actually very helpful in updating older houses because it enables you to put in extra insulation beneath the siding. And I do think that we should update older homes as much as possible so that we don't have to keep destroying green spaces to build more overpriced developments.

Personally, I think that in newer homes, bathrooms are way larger than they need be. I don't understand having a separate shower and bathtub because I doubt many -- if any -- people will bathe while someone else showers beside them... if for no other reason than the availability of hot water.

But I think so many people have been sort of brainwashed into thinking certain features are "classier" or better and it becomes some kind of status symbol.

and then it just gets ridiculous.

To summarize you hate new homes, hgtv and want all the same communist housing.

[Anonymous]

Lots of under employed urban planning bozos recycling the standard drivel about their pet peeves and how everyone else should live. Fuck 'em.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hate it when builders and realtors call the master BR the "owner's suite." I keep looking over my shoulder for Dan Snyder.

Agent here. Agents do that because "master bedroom" is sexist.

Oh please. "Master" doesn't have any sexist connotatioins in this context, especially since most features in MBRs and baths seem oriented toward women. "Owner's suite" sounds so pretentious. "Mistress suite," on the other hand, sounds interesting....

[Anonymous]

We built new for one reason: because in this area, wet basements are very, very common and we have asthma issues in the family. We had waterproofing done above-and-beyond builder's grade, put in an air exchanger so the house would breathe in a controlled manner, and UV lights in the main duct. Worked wonders for my daughter.

Love old homes - I'm a New Englander after all - but they are a respiratory nightmare to those sensitive!

[Anonymous]

I am PP. We did put the same UV lights in the Reston home and graded the property so the water ran away. Had an environmental team help us with all of that.

A couple months after we moved, the new buyer contacted us saying that his allergies were SO much improved and he was SO happy. That made me feel really nice, that the buyer was happy enough to let us know this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Driveways on expensive houses should be blacktop or pavers. Walkways should be brick, flagstone or pavers (not the concrete slabs that are usually used for mounting a/c units).....

Isn't blacktop sort of a pain to maintain? And wouldn't weeds grow between pavers? And flagstone gets so slippery in the rain! Give me good old fashioned concrete any day of the week!

We have a paver driveway and it looks beautiful. Have never had an issue with weeds. I think blacktop looks cheap. Would rather have concrete if I didn't want to pay the $$ for pavers.

[Anonymous]

Every concrete driveway in my neighborhood looks either bland or worn with stains.....

[Anonymous]

You guys seriously don't know the cost of putting in an asphalt driveway versus a concrete one? And judging by your ridiculous and biased comments, you sure as hll don't know the lifespan or cost of maintenance of each either.
And yet you still wonder and ridicule why most quality home have concrete....