Too expensive. I think it should be under 700K.

^^PP above, I also think it's staged fine and love the spare, minimalist decorating. I often think I should have been a Buddhist monk.

I think the inside is beautiful and could easily be warmed up with soft neutral paints and scatter rugs.

I like houses that appear very modest on the outside and then surprise you when you open the door. I much prefer that to ostentatious exteriors. Plus I grew up in a neighborhood with similar homes, so maybe that is why it looks fine to me.

The house is NOT a mid century. It's a contemporary from the 70s,and completely failing at that. The renovations are not contemporary or modern, they're quasi traditional and ugly. They don't fit the style of the house at all. The staging is also poorly done. It ends up just highlighting the fact that it is neither a traditional home, nor a true contemporary in its current state.

Seems like it must be overpriced as well. The yard is in need of TLC, and there aren't any decent outdoor spaces. The front is really unnattractrive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The main bedroom is on the lower floor. Big no no when it comes to families with kids.

We are a family with kids with a lower floor master and love it. Interestingly, a lot of new homes I see, especially in the South, are built with ground level master suites.

Yes, I thought the 1st floor master was a desirable feature and was in a lot of newer home floor plans (within the last 5-10 years or so). I do get not wanting a first floor master if you have very young kids, though.

The popularity of 1st floor master BRs in the South is largely due to the number of retirees buying down there. They don't want to climb stairs with bad knees/hips and fragile bones.

That's a really great house. I can't quite tell where it is, though - not familiar with any of the streets and I lived near Oakton for 12 years. I think maybe the price is a bit high for where it is, though I'd think the land was pretty valuable.

There is a market for contemporary homes here, but it is a smaller market than that for traditional homes.

Because it is not a 1960's retro-chic or new contemporary. It is a 1970's contemporary to which someone added a ghastly two car garage, making it look like an offic building.

Because it's a "contemporary" which means hopelessly outdated.
It's also in Oakton.

Anonymous wrote:I seriously hate contemporaries. I would rather live in an apartment than an ugly house.

It's not ugly.

You simply have poor taste.

I like it, but it's about $100K over in price.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Over priced, only architects and weirdos like mid centuries and both are poor.

Hahaha, I think you may be right. I am a West Coast oddball and I love it. But how many architects or weirdos want to live in Oakton?

This

what might work in North Arlington, or NW DC, or in Lake Barcroft may not be as appealing to the folks who want to live in Oakton. BTW I also like it, but I'm looking to move to a condo in the city - I'm tired of the glories of Fairfax County

Yep. Count me among those who actually like it, but are not interested in living in Oakton.

Another person who likes it. Guess I'm poor and weird (and not interested in living in Oakton). It is always nice to hear that the houses that I prefer, which is basically anything BUT a center hall colonial, are the houses that "everyone" else hates. I'll take a nice rambler, split level/foyer, contemporary any day.

Main floor bedroom is great! I think it looks great on the inside too--I hate the houses that are all mid-century modern or a period piece--makes them look like a museum, and anyone could decorate more modern. Contemporary is not very popular--this is a very traditional area. There is also no curb appeal at all, and the outside of the house looks very blah.

I usually *love* mid century modern homes but this house is having an identity crisis. The Kitchen, bathrooms, and closets can't decide if their traditional or modern.

It's like dating: I wanted a man that was sure of himself. I need a house that does the same. Embrace mid-century modernity!

I seriously hate contemporaries. I would rather live in an apartment than an ugly house.

Anonymous wrote:

The main bedroom is on the lower floor. Big no no when it comes to families with kids.

We are a family with kids with a lower floor master and love it. Interestingly, a lot of new homes I see, especially in the South, are built with ground level master suites.

Yes, I thought the 1st floor master was a desirable feature and was in a lot of newer home floor plans (within the last 5-10 years or so). I do get not wanting a first floor master if you have very young kids, though.