Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've never seen one that isn't ugly. That is not to say I don't think there can be nice ones, but I think that requires a special kind of architect and client. They are all cheap looking and give me headaches.

There's this: http://images.bwbx.io/cms/2012-11-16/1116_mcmansion_630x420.jpg

And then there's this: http://www.miamitenniscamps.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/modernist-architecture.jpg

I'd rather live in my 650 sq ft condo forever than the first one.

Remember to pull out those pots and pans out before preheating the oven.

Remember to download a podcast for your hours long commute.

Don't be ridiculous, McLean and Bethesda are full of houses just like the first one, and no one who lives there commutes to DC for hours. You're stereotyping.

Yep- just like people who live in small spaces don't all use their ovens for storage. It's called context idiot

No, it's called putting up a clean argument without cliches or name-calling. You should try it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've never seen one that isn't ugly. That is not to say I don't think there can be nice ones, but I think that requires a special kind of architect and client. They are all cheap looking and give me headaches.

There's this: http://images.bwbx.io/cms/2012-11-16/1116_mcmansion_630x420.jpg

And then there's this: http://www.miamitenniscamps.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/modernist-architecture.jpg

I'd rather live in my 650 sq ft condo forever than the first one.

Remember to pull out those pots and pans out before preheating the oven.

Remember to download a podcast for your hours long commute.

Don't be ridiculous, McLean and Bethesda are full of houses just like the first one, and no one who lives there commutes to DC for hours. You're stereotyping.

Yep- just like people who live in small spaces don't all use their ovens for storage. It's called context idiot

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've never seen one that isn't ugly. That is not to say I don't think there can be nice ones, but I think that requires a special kind of architect and client. They are all cheap looking and give me headaches.

There's this: http://images.bwbx.io/cms/2012-11-16/1116_mcmansion_630x420.jpg

And then there's this: http://www.miamitenniscamps.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/modernist-architecture.jpg

I'd rather live in my 650 sq ft condo forever than the first one.

Remember to pull out those pots and pans out before preheating the oven.

Remember to download a podcast for your hours long commute.

Don't be ridiculous, McLean and Bethesda are full of houses just like the first one, and no one who lives there commutes to DC for hours. You're stereotyping.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. Their anger should be with the code and zoning laws, not the builder.


Getting mad at the builder is like screaming at starbucks for selling expensive coffee and putting the local coffee shop out of business. That is not Starbucks fault.


Rally support for everyone to push back on the new builds - make sure that you tell these folks that it will lower their property values and the services the community can provide. Start making signs

I'm not really "angry" but it's definitely disappointing to see our neighborhood change just because of some greedy builders. Ideally, we'd have a community-minded builder who builds to suit the neighborhood. Actually there are two smaller builders who build more modest homes, but they probably only get 10-20% of new builds around here. I'd buy one of their homes for sure.

Your neighborhood isn't changing because of the greedy builders. It is changing because of the buyers who buy what they sell. No one owns neighborhoods. Things change. If you live in a neighborhood where economics are in favor of the new build rather than remodel, the new builds will become more common, and they will become the neighborhood. Unless your neighborhood has a protected status, it is not immune from change, and no one is obligated to fit in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. Their anger should be with the code and zoning laws, not the builder.


Getting mad at the builder is like screaming at starbucks for selling expensive coffee and putting the local coffee shop out of business. That is not Starbucks fault.


Rally support for everyone to push back on the new builds - make sure that you tell these folks that it will lower their property values and the services the community can provide. Start making signs

I'm not really "angry" but it's definitely disappointing to see our neighborhood change just because of some greedy builders. Ideally, we'd have a community-minded builder who builds to suit the neighborhood. Actually there are two smaller builders who build more modest homes, but they probably only get 10-20% of new builds around here. I'd buy one of their homes for sure.

Your neighborhood isn't changing because of the greedy builders. It is changing because of the buyers who buy what they sell. No one owns neighborhoods. Things change. If you live in a neighborhood where economics are in favor of the new build rather than remodel, the new builds will become more common, and they will become the neighborhood. Unless your neighborhood has a protected status, it is not immune from change, and no one is obligated to fit in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. Their anger should be with the code and zoning laws, not the builder.


Getting mad at the builder is like screaming at starbucks for selling expensive coffee and putting the local coffee shop out of business. That is not Starbucks fault.


Rally support for everyone to push back on the new builds - make sure that you tell these folks that it will lower their property values and the services the community can provide. Start making signs

I'm not really "angry" but it's definitely disappointing to see our neighborhood change just because of some greedy builders. Ideally, we'd have a community-minded builder who builds to suit the neighborhood. Actually there are two smaller builders who build more modest homes, but they probably only get 10-20% of new builds around here. I'd buy one of their homes for sure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've never seen one that isn't ugly. That is not to say I don't think there can be nice ones, but I think that requires a special kind of architect and client. They are all cheap looking and give me headaches.

There's this: http://images.bwbx.io/cms/2012-11-16/1116_mcmansion_630x420.jpg

And then there's this: http://www.miamitenniscamps.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/modernist-architecture.jpg

I'd rather live in my 650 sq ft condo forever than the first one.

Remember to pull out those pots and pans out before preheating the oven.

Remember to download a podcast for your hours long commute.

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. Their anger should be with the code and zoning laws, not the builder.


Getting mad at the builder is like screaming at starbucks for selling expensive coffee and putting the local coffee shop out of business. That is not Starbucks fault.


Rally support for everyone to push back on the new builds - make sure that you tell these folks that it will lower their property values and the services the community can provide. Start making signs

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've never seen one that isn't ugly. That is not to say I don't think there can be nice ones, but I think that requires a special kind of architect and client. They are all cheap looking and give me headaches.

There's this: http://images.bwbx.io/cms/2012-11-16/1116_mcmansion_630x420.jpg

And then there's this: http://www.miamitenniscamps.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/modernist-architecture.jpg

I'd rather live in my 650 sq ft condo forever than the first one.

Remember to pull out those pots and pans out before preheating the oven.

Remember to download a podcast for your hours long commute.

Or two

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blaming the developers per some of the comments above is so misguided.


Demand sets property values. Property values set price.

If there was less demand for larger new builds, they would not be built.

Scenario #1

Buy Existing House - $700K
Build New House - assume $150 per SF simply for sake of argument - 4,000 SF - = $600K
Builder Profit - 20%, transaction fees, etc - 350K

Sales price $1,650K


Scenario #2
Buy Existing House - $700K
Build New House - assume $150 per SF simply for sake of argument - 2,000 SF - = $300K
Builder Profit - 20%, transaction fees, etc - 230K

Sales Price $1,230K


Three things happening here

First - The builder makes more money provided that there is a market for the larger house

Second - the smaller house still costs $1,230,000 (and probably slight more on a SF basis) which I don't think most would consider affordable unless..........


Third - the price of the existing home inventory is largely a function of the price of a new build. Simply put, if you are in an old house surrounded by new builds you should thank them for putting money in your pocket.


The builder/developer is just responding to the market. Land is a scarce commodity, more so in desirable areas - this is capitalism at its best. If you really disagree, grab your neighbors, fight and get zoning laws changed. The builder is working within the law and responding to the market. Your anger with the developer is misplaced. Even if he was providing the product you desire, you couldn't afford it unless everybody took a haircut in the value of their house.

100% BS

The builder is ONLY trying to maximize profit. He doesn't care about the neighborhood or fitting in. Once he makes his sale he never looks back. It has nothing to do with the market. There is way more demand at $1.2M than $1.6M. Some sucker will come along though so eventually the $1.6M will sell. But it's not what the market generally wants. The one and only reason why we have so many over-sized new home is that builders are greedy. Period.

+ 1000

You are missing the point. It isn't the builders job to care about the neighborhood.

Also, he doesn't care of there is more demand at $1.2, than $1.6M He only has one, or at most, a couple, of houses to sell. Tract builders worry about maximizing the size of their market because they have a bunch of houses to sell.


I am done wasting my breath. You look at it as a neighborhood - the builder looks at it as a business. I stand by my statement that your anger is misplaced.

They aren't missing the point. They are angry that someone is making a profit without care about the impact on their community.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:@ 9:22 - people get petty and spin a lot when they get frustrated about what they can't have. I could not imagine spending my life that way - how miserable.

No amount of "grabbing your neighbors" is going to change that.

Given that there are people who DO have money, who buy townhouses in Georgetown, and condos in Logan Circle, etc, why do you assume that everyone who does or does not have money who dislikes McMansions secretly wants to live in one? I mean I know its a nice pat response whenever someone knocks one, but does it matter that its actually not true?

I think they just say that because they know they bought a big 'ole ugly house and are embarrassed. Trying to shift the focus off the fact that they have bad taste.

People can spend their money on many options - swanky urban area, renovated historic home, oversized McMansion. It's not the money - it's what you do with it.

Uh huh. And maybe well-to-do types who buy in a "swanky urban area" like Logan Circle and still dump on "McMansions" are trying to shift the focus from their own decision to buy in neighborhoods suited to closeted lawyers who arrange late-afternoon hook-ups at sleazy hotels.

Wow, you are really a piece of work.

Don't even bother. These people are so deluded about good taste and wealth it is no use. Trying to get through to them would completely shatter their world view and sense of self worth. Let them be in their tacky homes. It makes no difference to the rest of us. But make no mistake - we see you, and we are looking down on you.

There is no "we" or "us." There's just you, a little person who uses plurals to seek safety in numbers, as if your opinion isn't good enough to stand on its own.

There is me too, and I am different from the PP you responded to.. Ask Jeff if you do not believe me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blaming the developers per some of the comments above is so misguided.


Demand sets property values. Property values set price.

If there was less demand for larger new builds, they would not be built.

Scenario #1

Buy Existing House - $700K
Build New House - assume $150 per SF simply for sake of argument - 4,000 SF - = $600K
Builder Profit - 20%, transaction fees, etc - 350K

Sales price $1,650K


Scenario #2
Buy Existing House - $700K
Build New House - assume $150 per SF simply for sake of argument - 2,000 SF - = $300K
Builder Profit - 20%, transaction fees, etc - 230K

Sales Price $1,230K


Three things happening here

First - The builder makes more money provided that there is a market for the larger house

Second - the smaller house still costs $1,230,000 (and probably slight more on a SF basis) which I don't think most would consider affordable unless..........


Third - the price of the existing home inventory is largely a function of the price of a new build. Simply put, if you are in an old house surrounded by new builds you should thank them for putting money in your pocket.


The builder/developer is just responding to the market. Land is a scarce commodity, more so in desirable areas - this is capitalism at its best. If you really disagree, grab your neighbors, fight and get zoning laws changed. The builder is working within the law and responding to the market. Your anger with the developer is misplaced. Even if he was providing the product you desire, you couldn't afford it unless everybody took a haircut in the value of their house.

100% BS

The builder is ONLY trying to maximize profit. He doesn't care about the neighborhood or fitting in. Once he makes his sale he never looks back. It has nothing to do with the market. There is way more demand at $1.2M than $1.6M. Some sucker will come along though so eventually the $1.6M will sell. But it's not what the market generally wants. The one and only reason why we have so many over-sized new home is that builders are greedy. Period.

+ 1000

You are missing the point. It isn't the builders job to care about the neighborhood.

Also, he doesn't care of there is more demand at $1.2, than $1.6M He only has one, or at most, a couple, of houses to sell. Tract builders worry about maximizing the size of their market because they have a bunch of houses to sell.


I am done wasting my breath. You look at it as a neighborhood - the builder looks at it as a business. I stand by my statement that your anger is misplaced.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blaming the developers per some of the comments above is so misguided.


Demand sets property values. Property values set price.

If there was less demand for larger new builds, they would not be built.

Scenario #1

Buy Existing House - $700K
Build New House - assume $150 per SF simply for sake of argument - 4,000 SF - = $600K
Builder Profit - 20%, transaction fees, etc - 350K

Sales price $1,650K


Scenario #2
Buy Existing House - $700K
Build New House - assume $150 per SF simply for sake of argument - 2,000 SF - = $300K
Builder Profit - 20%, transaction fees, etc - 230K

Sales Price $1,230K


Three things happening here

First - The builder makes more money provided that there is a market for the larger house

Second - the smaller house still costs $1,230,000 (and probably slight more on a SF basis) which I don't think most would consider affordable unless..........


Third - the price of the existing home inventory is largely a function of the price of a new build. Simply put, if you are in an old house surrounded by new builds you should thank them for putting money in your pocket.


The builder/developer is just responding to the market. Land is a scarce commodity, more so in desirable areas - this is capitalism at its best. If you really disagree, grab your neighbors, fight and get zoning laws changed. The builder is working within the law and responding to the market. Your anger with the developer is misplaced. Even if he was providing the product you desire, you couldn't afford it unless everybody took a haircut in the value of their house.

100% BS

The builder is ONLY trying to maximize profit. He doesn't care about the neighborhood or fitting in. Once he makes his sale he never looks back. It has nothing to do with the market. There is way more demand at $1.2M than $1.6M. Some sucker will come along though so eventually the $1.6M will sell. But it's not what the market generally wants. The one and only reason why we have so many over-sized new home is that builders are greedy. Period.

+ 1000