Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This ones qualifies as a Garage Mahal McMansion, because of the ridiculous prominent placement of, well, you can see. Bonus points for the gratuitous and masturbatory turret.

Could you explain this term to me?

It means that turrets can only be placed on 1920 rowhouses in Dupont Circle and Capitol Hill and authentically bogus 1930s Tudors in Wesley Heights. Anywhere or anytime else, it's considered cheesy by the housing police.

Anonymous wrote:Here is what the side of a mcmansion looks like:

This really captures the essence of it.

Anonymous wrote:This ones qualifies as a Garage Mahal McMansion, because of the ridiculous prominent placement of, well, you can see. Bonus points for the gratuitous and masturbatory turret.

Could you explain this term to me?

Last time I drove thru my childhood neighborhood near Burning Tree ES (McMansion central) I noticed several turrets. Are we moving away from Craftman style toward Castle style?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People, the first two are not McMansions, they are just normal houses. People who build smaller homes than those will have a hard time selling, unfortunately.

And in what Hobbit land do you live?

sorry you are wrong, the hobbit land would be where the small homes are normal. what "Giant Ogre" land do you live in is the proper question.

No you are wrong. Hobbits live in a made up magical land. So THEREFORE in this land these houses would be considered "normal". Wrong interpretation my friend.

Garage Mahal! LOL!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anything that looks like the house is photobombing a photo of the garage, like this:

You, sir or ma'am, are HI-larious.

It's ma'am, and thank you!

I think I've posted the majority of these, and have limited mine to the infill development type. I will move on to cookie cutter subdivisions in the outer burbs later. Those are usually worse.

Here is what the side of a mcmansion looks like:

McMansion 619 up, 70 down
A large and pretentious house, typically
of shoddy construction, typical of "upscale" suburban developments in the late
20th and early 21st centuries. Such houses
are characterized by steep roofs of complex design, theatrical entrances, lack of stylistic integrity and backsides which are
notably less fussy than their fronts. They are often placed closely together to maximize the developer's profits and appeal to people who value perceived social status over actual, physical, economic or historic value.

All the houses but one seem pretty normal to me.

Umm no variance you moron, thats standard setbacks. How small of a home do you want? What is the magical number? 1000 sqrft per acre?

There was a variance, on file downtown, but it's wonderful that you feel comfortable on DCUM displaying your stupidity with abandon. Also amazing how you can read my mind and know exactly which house of the 1,000 or so in CCDC I was describing! Quick: what's the next winning Powerball number combo??

The house I mentioned exceeds height limits by use of creative grading, and it rec'd a variance from the back lot line.

the true mcmansion are those developments out in ashburn or farther out

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What's wrong with that one? Maybe its not perfect, but it hardly seems in a league with the other examples posted here.

I agree. I don't like the front entrance, but the garage isn't bad and it's also on a decent-sized lot. Not a McMansion.

I like the other details and wouldn't want to live in a box simply because it adheres to some rigid sense of functionality.

again none of these homes look a like good try

This ones qualifies as a Garage Mahal McMansion, because of the ridiculous prominent placement of, well, you can see. Bonus points for the gratuitous and masturbatory turret.