Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else getting prison vibes?

I think tudors are beautiful - this is a McTudor and not well done

certainly not a "mc" anything.

Agree!!

Guess is something came up in inspection. Or else financing fell through with the rate hike.

it's back on the market!

What happened?

Anonymous wrote:The house is under contract now.
Ha, ha, ha, ….

I wonder if there was a bidding war. One-acre (.99) with a stone house in the Whitman district sounds like a steal at $2.5M, when that crappy Mc-whatever on a small lot in WJ-land is listed at $2.8M.

The house is under contract now.
Ha, ha, ha, ….

This house/property is undeniably a stunner.

It’s a good example of how when you mix “modern” into your renovation, a few decades later the “modern” parts are going to feel dated and the mismatch will be less appealing. But even when your brain is screaming “1995!” looking at some of it I think they made good choices overall and you could update things like the doors, lighting and bathroom fixtures and get pretty well out of that zone. It’s always a balancing act between historic renovation and updated living so to some extent this always happens and 1995 was almost 30 years ago after all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else getting prison vibes?

I think tudors are beautiful - this is a McTudor and not well done

certainly not a "mc" anything.

Yup! It’s totally fine to hate this place, but it’s obviously a cu$tom place. Basically the opposite of the on-trend, mass-produced McMansions.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else getting prison vibes?

I think tudors are beautiful - this is a McTudor and not well done

certainly not a "mc" anything.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else getting prison vibes?

I think tudors are beautiful - this is a McTudor and not well done

It’s a Norman, not a Tudor. I’m interested in what others consider an attractive Norman or, for that matter, an attractive Tudor.

Anyone else getting prison vibes?

I think tudors are beautiful - this is a McTudor and not well done

Anonymous wrote:
Sorry, coming to the party late...

Can someone please explain the random door in photos 23/24?

It looks a lot like a bunkie that stands separate on the property, but these photos are so disconjointed and out of order, it's hard to determine where anything in the house and on tge property really is (I wish realtors would post the photos numerically, to match the flow of the home, as if you were walking through it).

That could be the shed

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t the kind of home people are looking for these days. Also, it’s not terribly attractive on the inside. While there are some nice features, like the family room with beams, a lot of the rooms are cut in odd shapes, outdated, and mixed with modernist touches. The stark white walls make the place feel emotionally cold, which is echoed by the hard tile floors. Spend your money elsewhere.

It looks like the vast majority of windows have been replaced with floor to ceiling models... and the indoor/outdoor Florida room of the dining room in photos 36/37/38 is GORGEOUS.

Sorry, coming to the party late...

Can someone please explain the random door in photos 23/24?

It looks a lot like a bunkie that stands separate on the property, but these photos are so disconjointed and out of order, it's hard to determine where anything in the house and on tge property really is (I wish realtors would post the photos numerically, to match the flow of the home, as if you were walking through it).

Anonymous wrote:The should throw any potential buyers who want to tear it down in that pond

👏👏👏

Anonymous wrote:Meh, the floors are terrible and that kitchen is awful, along with the bathrooms. It shouldn't be priced more than $1.6 million. The grounds are the selling point, everything else could you upgrading and streamlining.

This is hatred passing as analysis. Or just someone with a laughable simple pricing model.