Anonymous wrote:I hate that textured stuff they put in new houses (and promptly paint stark white). Looks like the interior of a Holiday Inn Express and it costs a FORTUNE to replace.
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
Anonymous wrote:pp, I must agree w/ the engineer. Not that you have to be one to know that there is a balance between form and function. I would rather see garage doors than see stuck on shutters (no function, questionable form).

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Garage doors on the front of a house is utterly HIDEOUS and tacky. The garage doors can NOT be on the front of a house.
Hate all to wall2wall carpet (crapet). Having a mice carpet (like a pretty wool Stark) bound and used as an area rug or cut to a rooms dimensions with a few feet of wood flooring showing in a border is very pretty though.
And, of course the houses with an more $$ material on front (brick or stone) and nasty siding on the other 3 sides. Also, too much mixed material on the outside of a home (stone and brick and clapboard and raw deck wood etc....).
Drywall. Sadly though its unavoidable these days. Our houses have all had plaster walls but you can not avoid drywall if there is an addition or renovation.
Low ceilings
Most of this stuff is only found on new houses and I (usually only) like older house.
Agree w/ most of this except that some lots are not big enough to have garage doors elsewhere. If they are made of wood they are not an eyesore.
Don't mean to get all shaker practical, but what is the point of the 2 feet of floor showing.
Ceiling heights are going up again.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Please, all you PPs with such highclass taste: post pictures of your own stunning abodes so we can all bask in your glory.
Well, I dont have a picture of my house on my computer (really, who does?) but it is a 1900s American Four Square in NWDC and it is gorgeous and not too big, not too small, with an appropriate addition and updated bathrooms and kitchen, nice big yard, detached garage in back, basically the perfect house IMHO BUT that doesnt mean I would expect you to think so. If you live a new house with faux brick front and two big garage doors and vinyl siding on all the rest with a big fat deck off the back, and lots of nylon pile wall to wall, and you are happy with it, then great for you. That is why there are so many different kinds of architecture and neighborhoods and interior design styles. I have yet to see anyone use the word "class" besides you.
That's your opinion many of us younger families want size effeciency and the modern look. It doesn't have anything to do with class. Also there is a reason why your homes are no longer being built because they are last century out of style.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Please, all you PPs with such highclass taste: post pictures of your own stunning abodes so we can all bask in your glory.
Well, I dont have a picture of my house on my computer (really, who does?) but it is a 1900s American Four Square in NWDC and it is gorgeous and not too big, not too small, with an appropriate addition and updated bathrooms and kitchen, nice big yard, detached garage in back, basically the perfect house IMHO BUT that doesnt mean I would expect you to think so. If you live a new house with faux brick front and two big garage doors and vinyl siding on all the rest with a big fat deck off the back, and lots of nylon pile wall to wall, and you are happy with it, then great for you. That is why there are so many different kinds of architecture and neighborhoods and interior design styles. I have yet to see anyone use the word "class" besides you.
Anonymous wrote:Please, all you PPs with such highclass taste: post pictures of your own stunning abodes so we can all bask in your glory.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's one thing to have opinions about what you like and it's quite another to let it eliminate a good house. If you're on this list, you're probably looking at houses that cost $500k or more. Stuck on shutters and pavers seem like really cheap things to fix. If you fall in love with a house you might be willing to pay $10k or more to fix these problems.
For me, I don't like wall to wall carpet, granite counter tops, dark kitchen cabinets and upstairs laundry rooms.
Upstairs laundry rooms are the best!!
Anonymous wrote:So far this thread has been dominated by the post-1980 crowd. Knock yourselves out, but I live in town and here is what I hate:
A lovely red brick Colonial from 1928 made from real, $$$ material (slate, brick-thru walls, old-growth wood, etc). And what's that cancer incongruously tacked onto the side, back, and jutting out of the 3rd floor? Why, yes, is a super cheap addition made from all the shitty cheap Home Depot-grade materials you can think of.
It's really important that the cheap addition (which contains granite or marble countertops, I -guarantee- that splurge) be Optic, blinding white. Why: so it contrasts as much as possible with the patina on the red brick and tan stone of the original house.
Anonymous wrote:Garage doors on the front of a house is utterly HIDEOUS and tacky. The garage doors can NOT be on the front of a house.
Hate all to wall2wall carpet (crapet). Having a mice carpet (like a pretty wool Stark) bound and used as an area rug or cut to a rooms dimensions with a few feet of wood flooring showing in a border is very pretty though.
And, of course the houses with an more $$ material on front (brick or stone) and nasty siding on the other 3 sides. Also, too much mixed material on the outside of a home (stone and brick and clapboard and raw deck wood etc....).
Drywall. Sadly though its unavoidable these days. Our houses have all had plaster walls but you can not avoid drywall if there is an addition or renovation.
Low ceilings
Most of this stuff is only found on new houses and I (usually only) like older house.