worst pictures in the MLS contest

[CA renter]

[quote=eavesdropper][quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper]
CAR, wish I had your faith, but I fear that if most of the citizenry started to design their own houses, it would be worse than what most of the big developers are doing.

They’d have to start a new magazine: “Architectural InDIGESTion” (yeah, I know…that’s really bad. But it’s late in the day here in the east).

Call me a snob. But trust me on this one. If you want to get an idea of what happens when people have a construction loan, a yen to be a “designer”, and a little time on their hands, click on the link: http://homesoftherich.net/2009/06/inside-teresa-giudices-new-jersey-mansion.html

*Don’t miss the video house tour halfway down the page. See something you just gotta have? Link to the catalog for the October 3 bankruptcy auction:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?AuctionID=559&fuseaction=home.auctionDetails%5B/quote%5D

Funny. 🙂 You’d be surprised how many spec houses around here try to look just like that.

Nothing says “tacky” quite like this does:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=15
——————-

Yes, I try to have faith in my fellow (wo)man. 🙂

There are lots of beautiful custom homes in some of the older neighborhoods. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get back to those standards again?[/quote]

It’s amazing, isn’t it? That huge mirror makes the vanity look like doll furniture. My person fave was this one:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=12

I’m not even sure what the hell that IS! Looks like a giant chess piece. What really impressed me are the mold lines in the resin. After all, if you’re going to pay for quality, you want it to be in clear evidence.

And I confess to having my head turned (or was it my stomach) by the cherub on the floor in front of the fireplace: the creative use of a variety of metal finishes does it for me.

Don’t know if any Piggs are “fans” of the Bravo TV “Housewives” series, but these are pix from the short-term home of New Jersey-residing, dinner table-flipping, Medusa-like serpent-haired Teresa Giuduce. While she was conducting her new home tour for the less-fortunate members of her show’s audience, news reports were appearing that she and her husband were in bankruptcy court, having dropped $11 million in the previous year (on an income of $16,000/month, some of which was provided by relatives). Thus, your chance at getting some of the prized Giuduce booty for your own little slice of New Jersey.

Yes, CAR, there are some really great older custom homes out there. Here in the east, we have some going back to the 1700s. But it was criminal seeing what people were doing to them in the 90s and early aughts. Armed with HELOCS, they replaced hand-planed chestnut siding with vinyl, ripped out wide-plank heart-pine floors in favor of Brazilian cherry, put fake “Craftsman-style” facades on Victorians, and any number of heartbreaking “improvements.

They changed the character of entire cities here. Bethesda was a lovely near-DC suburb with large shade trees and other lush foliage, and loads of lovely tasteful family homes built between 1900 and 1960. Many were considered generously-sized for their day (2000+ square feet), and were balanced with their lot size (1/4 acre to 1 acre).

Bethesda has always been an in-demand area, not only because of its aesthetics, but because of its proximity to both DC and to large government installations like the NIH and Bethesda Naval Hospital. In the 90s, however, people started snatching up existing homes, and deciding that an additional 2500 sq ft wing would not be adequate for a family of four, they began to tear down the Victorians and the Craftsmans, the center-hall colonials and the mid-century ranchers. In their places rose McMansion monstrosities of 7000 and 8000 sf. Some houses that had boasted expansive tree-shaded front and back lawns, suddenly had room for only a few limited-growth shrubs in front. Lovely stone and brick facades were replaced with garage doors that fronted parking for 4 or 5 oversized vehicles, with lots of blacktop for overflow. Homes that had been a couple hundred feet apart from each other now had windows that permitted homeowners to see what their neighbor was cooking for dinner.

Many Bethesda residents were concerned about the changes to the character of their neighborhoods, but found little responsiveness to their pleas for restraint. Comparing aerial photos of these neighborhoods today with those of 1980 is shocking and saddening. In the meantime, many of these McMansions are on the market, and finding buyers for them is no easy task.

I have to laugh (or cry!) at the interpretation of architectural terms these days. I’m sorry, but nothing over 2000 sf should be termed a “cottage”. Here’s an excerpt from the website of a builder in the DC area:

“The Craftsman lifestyle offers friendly streetscapes and sensible, ecologically oriented homes that nurture families.” Not sure how you accomplish “friendly streetscapes” when you stuff a 5400 sf “bungalow” onto a 8300 sf lot. Sounds like more of a “bungalot” to me.

These architectural philosophers go on to say, “The antithesis of the “McMansion”, Arts & Crafts Builders’ homes are deliberately smaller, very comfortable inside and extremely efficient, cozy, and energy efficient. They are luxury homes but not in terms of size.” Pardon me, but when did 4000 or 5000 sf become “cozy”?

Some additional pearls of wisdom: “Mutt and Jeff decided from the start that they would not sacrifice quality for size. They committed themselves to building a comparatively smaller home (3,500 to 4,500 sqft) in order to deliver a higher quality product overall. The homes they build are luxury homes due to their superior components and finishes.”

These guys have actually built some of the better-looking structures – but keep in mind that everything is relative……There have always been ugly and tasteless homes out there. Lots of them. The difference is that they were smaller, and typically build on appropriately-sized lots. Nowadays you’ve got builders erecting 14 or 15 5,000 sf McMansions on 2.5 acres. There are several areas of gorgeous pristine rolling pastureland near where I live where they’ve done this, and these little mini-developments are made even more prominent and garish by the large amounts of open acreage around them. Many houses are still in the process of being built while their next door neighbors are in short sale proceedings.

Someone stop the madness!![/quote]

Eavesdropper,

What in the world are the planning commissions thinking when they allow these horribly ugly monstrosities?

We have the exact same problem here, although they are tearing down post-war bungalow or ranch-style homes here, not the nice, historical buildings you have. Nice neighborhoods with simple, comfortable, single-story homes and tree-lined streets are giving way to tiny lots devoid of any established vegetation and ugly, intrusive, boxy structures. I wish they’d do something about this trend. Maybe the end of the bubble can mean the end of destroying old neighborhoods for the benefit of spec builders. We can hope!

[CA renter]

[quote=eavesdropper][quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper]
CAR, wish I had your faith, but I fear that if most of the citizenry started to design their own houses, it would be worse than what most of the big developers are doing.

They’d have to start a new magazine: “Architectural InDIGESTion” (yeah, I know…that’s really bad. But it’s late in the day here in the east).

Call me a snob. But trust me on this one. If you want to get an idea of what happens when people have a construction loan, a yen to be a “designer”, and a little time on their hands, click on the link: http://homesoftherich.net/2009/06/inside-teresa-giudices-new-jersey-mansion.html

*Don’t miss the video house tour halfway down the page. See something you just gotta have? Link to the catalog for the October 3 bankruptcy auction:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?AuctionID=559&fuseaction=home.auctionDetails%5B/quote%5D

Funny. 🙂 You’d be surprised how many spec houses around here try to look just like that.

Nothing says “tacky” quite like this does:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=15
——————-

Yes, I try to have faith in my fellow (wo)man. 🙂

There are lots of beautiful custom homes in some of the older neighborhoods. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get back to those standards again?[/quote]

It’s amazing, isn’t it? That huge mirror makes the vanity look like doll furniture. My person fave was this one:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=12

I’m not even sure what the hell that IS! Looks like a giant chess piece. What really impressed me are the mold lines in the resin. After all, if you’re going to pay for quality, you want it to be in clear evidence.

And I confess to having my head turned (or was it my stomach) by the cherub on the floor in front of the fireplace: the creative use of a variety of metal finishes does it for me.

Don’t know if any Piggs are “fans” of the Bravo TV “Housewives” series, but these are pix from the short-term home of New Jersey-residing, dinner table-flipping, Medusa-like serpent-haired Teresa Giuduce. While she was conducting her new home tour for the less-fortunate members of her show’s audience, news reports were appearing that she and her husband were in bankruptcy court, having dropped $11 million in the previous year (on an income of $16,000/month, some of which was provided by relatives). Thus, your chance at getting some of the prized Giuduce booty for your own little slice of New Jersey.

Yes, CAR, there are some really great older custom homes out there. Here in the east, we have some going back to the 1700s. But it was criminal seeing what people were doing to them in the 90s and early aughts. Armed with HELOCS, they replaced hand-planed chestnut siding with vinyl, ripped out wide-plank heart-pine floors in favor of Brazilian cherry, put fake “Craftsman-style” facades on Victorians, and any number of heartbreaking “improvements.

They changed the character of entire cities here. Bethesda was a lovely near-DC suburb with large shade trees and other lush foliage, and loads of lovely tasteful family homes built between 1900 and 1960. Many were considered generously-sized for their day (2000+ square feet), and were balanced with their lot size (1/4 acre to 1 acre).

Bethesda has always been an in-demand area, not only because of its aesthetics, but because of its proximity to both DC and to large government installations like the NIH and Bethesda Naval Hospital. In the 90s, however, people started snatching up existing homes, and deciding that an additional 2500 sq ft wing would not be adequate for a family of four, they began to tear down the Victorians and the Craftsmans, the center-hall colonials and the mid-century ranchers. In their places rose McMansion monstrosities of 7000 and 8000 sf. Some houses that had boasted expansive tree-shaded front and back lawns, suddenly had room for only a few limited-growth shrubs in front. Lovely stone and brick facades were replaced with garage doors that fronted parking for 4 or 5 oversized vehicles, with lots of blacktop for overflow. Homes that had been a couple hundred feet apart from each other now had windows that permitted homeowners to see what their neighbor was cooking for dinner.

Many Bethesda residents were concerned about the changes to the character of their neighborhoods, but found little responsiveness to their pleas for restraint. Comparing aerial photos of these neighborhoods today with those of 1980 is shocking and saddening. In the meantime, many of these McMansions are on the market, and finding buyers for them is no easy task.

I have to laugh (or cry!) at the interpretation of architectural terms these days. I’m sorry, but nothing over 2000 sf should be termed a “cottage”. Here’s an excerpt from the website of a builder in the DC area:

“The Craftsman lifestyle offers friendly streetscapes and sensible, ecologically oriented homes that nurture families.” Not sure how you accomplish “friendly streetscapes” when you stuff a 5400 sf “bungalow” onto a 8300 sf lot. Sounds like more of a “bungalot” to me.

These architectural philosophers go on to say, “The antithesis of the “McMansion”, Arts & Crafts Builders’ homes are deliberately smaller, very comfortable inside and extremely efficient, cozy, and energy efficient. They are luxury homes but not in terms of size.” Pardon me, but when did 4000 or 5000 sf become “cozy”?

Some additional pearls of wisdom: “Mutt and Jeff decided from the start that they would not sacrifice quality for size. They committed themselves to building a comparatively smaller home (3,500 to 4,500 sqft) in order to deliver a higher quality product overall. The homes they build are luxury homes due to their superior components and finishes.”

These guys have actually built some of the better-looking structures – but keep in mind that everything is relative……There have always been ugly and tasteless homes out there. Lots of them. The difference is that they were smaller, and typically build on appropriately-sized lots. Nowadays you’ve got builders erecting 14 or 15 5,000 sf McMansions on 2.5 acres. There are several areas of gorgeous pristine rolling pastureland near where I live where they’ve done this, and these little mini-developments are made even more prominent and garish by the large amounts of open acreage around them. Many houses are still in the process of being built while their next door neighbors are in short sale proceedings.

Someone stop the madness!![/quote]

Eavesdropper,

What in the world are the planning commissions thinking when they allow these horribly ugly monstrosities?

We have the exact same problem here, although they are tearing down post-war bungalow or ranch-style homes here, not the nice, historical buildings you have. Nice neighborhoods with simple, comfortable, single-story homes and tree-lined streets are giving way to tiny lots devoid of any established vegetation and ugly, intrusive, boxy structures. I wish they’d do something about this trend. Maybe the end of the bubble can mean the end of destroying old neighborhoods for the benefit of spec builders. We can hope!

[CA renter]

[quote=eavesdropper][quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper]
CAR, wish I had your faith, but I fear that if most of the citizenry started to design their own houses, it would be worse than what most of the big developers are doing.

They’d have to start a new magazine: “Architectural InDIGESTion” (yeah, I know…that’s really bad. But it’s late in the day here in the east).

Call me a snob. But trust me on this one. If you want to get an idea of what happens when people have a construction loan, a yen to be a “designer”, and a little time on their hands, click on the link: http://homesoftherich.net/2009/06/inside-teresa-giudices-new-jersey-mansion.html

*Don’t miss the video house tour halfway down the page. See something you just gotta have? Link to the catalog for the October 3 bankruptcy auction:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?AuctionID=559&fuseaction=home.auctionDetails%5B/quote%5D

Funny. 🙂 You’d be surprised how many spec houses around here try to look just like that.

Nothing says “tacky” quite like this does:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=15
——————-

Yes, I try to have faith in my fellow (wo)man. 🙂

There are lots of beautiful custom homes in some of the older neighborhoods. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get back to those standards again?[/quote]

It’s amazing, isn’t it? That huge mirror makes the vanity look like doll furniture. My person fave was this one:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=12

I’m not even sure what the hell that IS! Looks like a giant chess piece. What really impressed me are the mold lines in the resin. After all, if you’re going to pay for quality, you want it to be in clear evidence.

And I confess to having my head turned (or was it my stomach) by the cherub on the floor in front of the fireplace: the creative use of a variety of metal finishes does it for me.

Don’t know if any Piggs are “fans” of the Bravo TV “Housewives” series, but these are pix from the short-term home of New Jersey-residing, dinner table-flipping, Medusa-like serpent-haired Teresa Giuduce. While she was conducting her new home tour for the less-fortunate members of her show’s audience, news reports were appearing that she and her husband were in bankruptcy court, having dropped $11 million in the previous year (on an income of $16,000/month, some of which was provided by relatives). Thus, your chance at getting some of the prized Giuduce booty for your own little slice of New Jersey.

Yes, CAR, there are some really great older custom homes out there. Here in the east, we have some going back to the 1700s. But it was criminal seeing what people were doing to them in the 90s and early aughts. Armed with HELOCS, they replaced hand-planed chestnut siding with vinyl, ripped out wide-plank heart-pine floors in favor of Brazilian cherry, put fake “Craftsman-style” facades on Victorians, and any number of heartbreaking “improvements.

They changed the character of entire cities here. Bethesda was a lovely near-DC suburb with large shade trees and other lush foliage, and loads of lovely tasteful family homes built between 1900 and 1960. Many were considered generously-sized for their day (2000+ square feet), and were balanced with their lot size (1/4 acre to 1 acre).

Bethesda has always been an in-demand area, not only because of its aesthetics, but because of its proximity to both DC and to large government installations like the NIH and Bethesda Naval Hospital. In the 90s, however, people started snatching up existing homes, and deciding that an additional 2500 sq ft wing would not be adequate for a family of four, they began to tear down the Victorians and the Craftsmans, the center-hall colonials and the mid-century ranchers. In their places rose McMansion monstrosities of 7000 and 8000 sf. Some houses that had boasted expansive tree-shaded front and back lawns, suddenly had room for only a few limited-growth shrubs in front. Lovely stone and brick facades were replaced with garage doors that fronted parking for 4 or 5 oversized vehicles, with lots of blacktop for overflow. Homes that had been a couple hundred feet apart from each other now had windows that permitted homeowners to see what their neighbor was cooking for dinner.

Many Bethesda residents were concerned about the changes to the character of their neighborhoods, but found little responsiveness to their pleas for restraint. Comparing aerial photos of these neighborhoods today with those of 1980 is shocking and saddening. In the meantime, many of these McMansions are on the market, and finding buyers for them is no easy task.

I have to laugh (or cry!) at the interpretation of architectural terms these days. I’m sorry, but nothing over 2000 sf should be termed a “cottage”. Here’s an excerpt from the website of a builder in the DC area:

“The Craftsman lifestyle offers friendly streetscapes and sensible, ecologically oriented homes that nurture families.” Not sure how you accomplish “friendly streetscapes” when you stuff a 5400 sf “bungalow” onto a 8300 sf lot. Sounds like more of a “bungalot” to me.

These architectural philosophers go on to say, “The antithesis of the “McMansion”, Arts & Crafts Builders’ homes are deliberately smaller, very comfortable inside and extremely efficient, cozy, and energy efficient. They are luxury homes but not in terms of size.” Pardon me, but when did 4000 or 5000 sf become “cozy”?

Some additional pearls of wisdom: “Mutt and Jeff decided from the start that they would not sacrifice quality for size. They committed themselves to building a comparatively smaller home (3,500 to 4,500 sqft) in order to deliver a higher quality product overall. The homes they build are luxury homes due to their superior components and finishes.”

These guys have actually built some of the better-looking structures – but keep in mind that everything is relative……There have always been ugly and tasteless homes out there. Lots of them. The difference is that they were smaller, and typically build on appropriately-sized lots. Nowadays you’ve got builders erecting 14 or 15 5,000 sf McMansions on 2.5 acres. There are several areas of gorgeous pristine rolling pastureland near where I live where they’ve done this, and these little mini-developments are made even more prominent and garish by the large amounts of open acreage around them. Many houses are still in the process of being built while their next door neighbors are in short sale proceedings.

Someone stop the madness!![/quote]

Eavesdropper,

What in the world are the planning commissions thinking when they allow these horribly ugly monstrosities?

We have the exact same problem here, although they are tearing down post-war bungalow or ranch-style homes here, not the nice, historical buildings you have. Nice neighborhoods with simple, comfortable, single-story homes and tree-lined streets are giving way to tiny lots devoid of any established vegetation and ugly, intrusive, boxy structures. I wish they’d do something about this trend. Maybe the end of the bubble can mean the end of destroying old neighborhoods for the benefit of spec builders. We can hope!

[CA renter]

[quote=eavesdropper][quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper]
CAR, wish I had your faith, but I fear that if most of the citizenry started to design their own houses, it would be worse than what most of the big developers are doing.

They’d have to start a new magazine: “Architectural InDIGESTion” (yeah, I know…that’s really bad. But it’s late in the day here in the east).

Call me a snob. But trust me on this one. If you want to get an idea of what happens when people have a construction loan, a yen to be a “designer”, and a little time on their hands, click on the link: http://homesoftherich.net/2009/06/inside-teresa-giudices-new-jersey-mansion.html

*Don’t miss the video house tour halfway down the page. See something you just gotta have? Link to the catalog for the October 3 bankruptcy auction:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?AuctionID=559&fuseaction=home.auctionDetails%5B/quote%5D

Funny. 🙂 You’d be surprised how many spec houses around here try to look just like that.

Nothing says “tacky” quite like this does:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=15
——————-

Yes, I try to have faith in my fellow (wo)man. 🙂

There are lots of beautiful custom homes in some of the older neighborhoods. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get back to those standards again?[/quote]

It’s amazing, isn’t it? That huge mirror makes the vanity look like doll furniture. My person fave was this one:

http://www.ajwillnerauctions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewItem&AuctionID=559&ItemID=12

I’m not even sure what the hell that IS! Looks like a giant chess piece. What really impressed me are the mold lines in the resin. After all, if you’re going to pay for quality, you want it to be in clear evidence.

And I confess to having my head turned (or was it my stomach) by the cherub on the floor in front of the fireplace: the creative use of a variety of metal finishes does it for me.

Don’t know if any Piggs are “fans” of the Bravo TV “Housewives” series, but these are pix from the short-term home of New Jersey-residing, dinner table-flipping, Medusa-like serpent-haired Teresa Giuduce. While she was conducting her new home tour for the less-fortunate members of her show’s audience, news reports were appearing that she and her husband were in bankruptcy court, having dropped $11 million in the previous year (on an income of $16,000/month, some of which was provided by relatives). Thus, your chance at getting some of the prized Giuduce booty for your own little slice of New Jersey.

Yes, CAR, there are some really great older custom homes out there. Here in the east, we have some going back to the 1700s. But it was criminal seeing what people were doing to them in the 90s and early aughts. Armed with HELOCS, they replaced hand-planed chestnut siding with vinyl, ripped out wide-plank heart-pine floors in favor of Brazilian cherry, put fake “Craftsman-style” facades on Victorians, and any number of heartbreaking “improvements.

They changed the character of entire cities here. Bethesda was a lovely near-DC suburb with large shade trees and other lush foliage, and loads of lovely tasteful family homes built between 1900 and 1960. Many were considered generously-sized for their day (2000+ square feet), and were balanced with their lot size (1/4 acre to 1 acre).

Bethesda has always been an in-demand area, not only because of its aesthetics, but because of its proximity to both DC and to large government installations like the NIH and Bethesda Naval Hospital. In the 90s, however, people started snatching up existing homes, and deciding that an additional 2500 sq ft wing would not be adequate for a family of four, they began to tear down the Victorians and the Craftsmans, the center-hall colonials and the mid-century ranchers. In their places rose McMansion monstrosities of 7000 and 8000 sf. Some houses that had boasted expansive tree-shaded front and back lawns, suddenly had room for only a few limited-growth shrubs in front. Lovely stone and brick facades were replaced with garage doors that fronted parking for 4 or 5 oversized vehicles, with lots of blacktop for overflow. Homes that had been a couple hundred feet apart from each other now had windows that permitted homeowners to see what their neighbor was cooking for dinner.

Many Bethesda residents were concerned about the changes to the character of their neighborhoods, but found little responsiveness to their pleas for restraint. Comparing aerial photos of these neighborhoods today with those of 1980 is shocking and saddening. In the meantime, many of these McMansions are on the market, and finding buyers for them is no easy task.

I have to laugh (or cry!) at the interpretation of architectural terms these days. I’m sorry, but nothing over 2000 sf should be termed a “cottage”. Here’s an excerpt from the website of a builder in the DC area:

“The Craftsman lifestyle offers friendly streetscapes and sensible, ecologically oriented homes that nurture families.” Not sure how you accomplish “friendly streetscapes” when you stuff a 5400 sf “bungalow” onto a 8300 sf lot. Sounds like more of a “bungalot” to me.

These architectural philosophers go on to say, “The antithesis of the “McMansion”, Arts & Crafts Builders’ homes are deliberately smaller, very comfortable inside and extremely efficient, cozy, and energy efficient. They are luxury homes but not in terms of size.” Pardon me, but when did 4000 or 5000 sf become “cozy”?

Some additional pearls of wisdom: “Mutt and Jeff decided from the start that they would not sacrifice quality for size. They committed themselves to building a comparatively smaller home (3,500 to 4,500 sqft) in order to deliver a higher quality product overall. The homes they build are luxury homes due to their superior components and finishes.”

These guys have actually built some of the better-looking structures – but keep in mind that everything is relative……There have always been ugly and tasteless homes out there. Lots of them. The difference is that they were smaller, and typically build on appropriately-sized lots. Nowadays you’ve got builders erecting 14 or 15 5,000 sf McMansions on 2.5 acres. There are several areas of gorgeous pristine rolling pastureland near where I live where they’ve done this, and these little mini-developments are made even more prominent and garish by the large amounts of open acreage around them. Many houses are still in the process of being built while their next door neighbors are in short sale proceedings.

Someone stop the madness!![/quote]

Eavesdropper,

What in the world are the planning commissions thinking when they allow these horribly ugly monstrosities?

We have the exact same problem here, although they are tearing down post-war bungalow or ranch-style homes here, not the nice, historical buildings you have. Nice neighborhoods with simple, comfortable, single-story homes and tree-lined streets are giving way to tiny lots devoid of any established vegetation and ugly, intrusive, boxy structures. I wish they’d do something about this trend. Maybe the end of the bubble can mean the end of destroying old neighborhoods for the benefit of spec builders. We can hope!

[jstoesz]

[quote]eavesdropper, your NJ Mcmansion is simply gaudy. It’s like an impersonal “cavern” with a few choice “empty” built-ins. It may as well be showcased on “Jersey Shore,” a favorite party-animal show of the current HS set.

CAR, you MUST review the link below. I think you would really appreciate all the love that went into true, authentic mid-century design. This architect is now deceased, but his voluminous works live on in SoCal.

http://www.modernsandiego.com/SimBruceRi…

His first house for his family IS STILL for sale in Pt. Loma:

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100031293-97…

I realize this home is not located in your area of interest but Sim Bruce Richards was one of the original “taliesins” of Frank Lloyd Wright (apprentices). There are a few more like him throughout the country but it takes a special buyer to appreciate all the work that has gone into the design of these homes!

Here’s another local link to peruse for local mid-century modern architecture. Enjoy!!

http://www.merceryork.com/
[/quote]

I badly want that sim bruce richards house…everything about it is awesome. I have been salivating over that for months, but there is no way that is in my price range!

Kind of a stupid thing to comment on but those over-sized door pulls are awesome.

[jstoesz]

[quote]eavesdropper, your NJ Mcmansion is simply gaudy. It’s like an impersonal “cavern” with a few choice “empty” built-ins. It may as well be showcased on “Jersey Shore,” a favorite party-animal show of the current HS set.

CAR, you MUST review the link below. I think you would really appreciate all the love that went into true, authentic mid-century design. This architect is now deceased, but his voluminous works live on in SoCal.

http://www.modernsandiego.com/SimBruceRi…

His first house for his family IS STILL for sale in Pt. Loma:

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100031293-97…

I realize this home is not located in your area of interest but Sim Bruce Richards was one of the original “taliesins” of Frank Lloyd Wright (apprentices). There are a few more like him throughout the country but it takes a special buyer to appreciate all the work that has gone into the design of these homes!

Here’s another local link to peruse for local mid-century modern architecture. Enjoy!!

http://www.merceryork.com/
[/quote]

I badly want that sim bruce richards house…everything about it is awesome. I have been salivating over that for months, but there is no way that is in my price range!

Kind of a stupid thing to comment on but those over-sized door pulls are awesome.

[jstoesz]

[quote]eavesdropper, your NJ Mcmansion is simply gaudy. It’s like an impersonal “cavern” with a few choice “empty” built-ins. It may as well be showcased on “Jersey Shore,” a favorite party-animal show of the current HS set.

CAR, you MUST review the link below. I think you would really appreciate all the love that went into true, authentic mid-century design. This architect is now deceased, but his voluminous works live on in SoCal.

http://www.modernsandiego.com/SimBruceRi…

His first house for his family IS STILL for sale in Pt. Loma:

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100031293-97…

I realize this home is not located in your area of interest but Sim Bruce Richards was one of the original “taliesins” of Frank Lloyd Wright (apprentices). There are a few more like him throughout the country but it takes a special buyer to appreciate all the work that has gone into the design of these homes!

Here’s another local link to peruse for local mid-century modern architecture. Enjoy!!

http://www.merceryork.com/
[/quote]

I badly want that sim bruce richards house…everything about it is awesome. I have been salivating over that for months, but there is no way that is in my price range!

Kind of a stupid thing to comment on but those over-sized door pulls are awesome.

[jstoesz]

[quote]eavesdropper, your NJ Mcmansion is simply gaudy. It’s like an impersonal “cavern” with a few choice “empty” built-ins. It may as well be showcased on “Jersey Shore,” a favorite party-animal show of the current HS set.

CAR, you MUST review the link below. I think you would really appreciate all the love that went into true, authentic mid-century design. This architect is now deceased, but his voluminous works live on in SoCal.

http://www.modernsandiego.com/SimBruceRi…

His first house for his family IS STILL for sale in Pt. Loma:

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100031293-97…

I realize this home is not located in your area of interest but Sim Bruce Richards was one of the original “taliesins” of Frank Lloyd Wright (apprentices). There are a few more like him throughout the country but it takes a special buyer to appreciate all the work that has gone into the design of these homes!

Here’s another local link to peruse for local mid-century modern architecture. Enjoy!!

http://www.merceryork.com/
[/quote]

I badly want that sim bruce richards house…everything about it is awesome. I have been salivating over that for months, but there is no way that is in my price range!

Kind of a stupid thing to comment on but those over-sized door pulls are awesome.

[jstoesz]

[quote]eavesdropper, your NJ Mcmansion is simply gaudy. It’s like an impersonal “cavern” with a few choice “empty” built-ins. It may as well be showcased on “Jersey Shore,” a favorite party-animal show of the current HS set.

CAR, you MUST review the link below. I think you would really appreciate all the love that went into true, authentic mid-century design. This architect is now deceased, but his voluminous works live on in SoCal.

http://www.modernsandiego.com/SimBruceRi…

His first house for his family IS STILL for sale in Pt. Loma:

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100031293-97…

I realize this home is not located in your area of interest but Sim Bruce Richards was one of the original “taliesins” of Frank Lloyd Wright (apprentices). There are a few more like him throughout the country but it takes a special buyer to appreciate all the work that has gone into the design of these homes!

Here’s another local link to peruse for local mid-century modern architecture. Enjoy!!

http://www.merceryork.com/
[/quote]

I badly want that sim bruce richards house…everything about it is awesome. I have been salivating over that for months, but there is no way that is in my price range!

Kind of a stupid thing to comment on but those over-sized door pulls are awesome.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter] Eavesdropper,

What in the world are the planning commissions thinking when they allow these horribly ugly monstrosities?

We have the exact same problem here, although they are tearing down post-war bungalow or ranch-style homes here, not the nice, historical buildings you have. Nice neighborhoods with simple, comfortable, single-story homes and tree-lined streets are giving way to tiny lots devoid of any established vegetation and ugly, intrusive, boxy structures. I wish they’d do something about this trend. Maybe the end of the bubble can mean the end of destroying old neighborhoods for the benefit of spec builders. We can hope![/quote]

You’re assuming that the people on the planning commissions are not only folks of aesthetic taste and refinement, but are incapable of taking bribes. And I think there was a bit of that going on during the housing boom.

As for your post-war bungalows vs. our nice historical buildings, I think we’re probably on the same page in believing that there can be beauty in any structure, regardless of the cost, just as we’ve learned how much bad taste money can buy. Some of my favorite neighborhoods here are in the small peninsulas that line the Chesapeake Bay. You can drive thru the streets, and see these delightful cottages from the 30s, bungalows from the 40s, and ranchers from the 50s. They’re anywhere from 650 to 1100 square feet, and the 50s and early 60s houses are sometimes painted in their original hues of aqua blue or salmon pink. They were built as homes for some of the workmen in the fishing and boating industries in these parts, or as modest summer weekend getaways for harried DC lawyers and white-collar government workers. They’re not going to be featured on the pages of Architectural Digest, but many of them have simple lines that, paired with the mature landscaping and the rock jettys, driftwood, and beaches of the Bay hearken back to a time when a house was shelter for your family, and not an exercise in trying to impress your family and outspend your friends.

There were so many of these charming little communities in these parts prior to the boom, before everybody and his brother decided they just had to have a beach house. Planning commissions stood by idly (or else they were counting their money) while horrendous oversized McMansions went up on teeny little beach lots beside the jury-rigged do-it-yourself structures that were erected by guys who fancied themselves weekend home construction warriors.

I’m with you in feeling that the one blessing of the housing bust was the cessation of this indiscriminate building in some of our most naturally beautiful areas.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter] Eavesdropper,

What in the world are the planning commissions thinking when they allow these horribly ugly monstrosities?

We have the exact same problem here, although they are tearing down post-war bungalow or ranch-style homes here, not the nice, historical buildings you have. Nice neighborhoods with simple, comfortable, single-story homes and tree-lined streets are giving way to tiny lots devoid of any established vegetation and ugly, intrusive, boxy structures. I wish they’d do something about this trend. Maybe the end of the bubble can mean the end of destroying old neighborhoods for the benefit of spec builders. We can hope![/quote]

You’re assuming that the people on the planning commissions are not only folks of aesthetic taste and refinement, but are incapable of taking bribes. And I think there was a bit of that going on during the housing boom.

As for your post-war bungalows vs. our nice historical buildings, I think we’re probably on the same page in believing that there can be beauty in any structure, regardless of the cost, just as we’ve learned how much bad taste money can buy. Some of my favorite neighborhoods here are in the small peninsulas that line the Chesapeake Bay. You can drive thru the streets, and see these delightful cottages from the 30s, bungalows from the 40s, and ranchers from the 50s. They’re anywhere from 650 to 1100 square feet, and the 50s and early 60s houses are sometimes painted in their original hues of aqua blue or salmon pink. They were built as homes for some of the workmen in the fishing and boating industries in these parts, or as modest summer weekend getaways for harried DC lawyers and white-collar government workers. They’re not going to be featured on the pages of Architectural Digest, but many of them have simple lines that, paired with the mature landscaping and the rock jettys, driftwood, and beaches of the Bay hearken back to a time when a house was shelter for your family, and not an exercise in trying to impress your family and outspend your friends.

There were so many of these charming little communities in these parts prior to the boom, before everybody and his brother decided they just had to have a beach house. Planning commissions stood by idly (or else they were counting their money) while horrendous oversized McMansions went up on teeny little beach lots beside the jury-rigged do-it-yourself structures that were erected by guys who fancied themselves weekend home construction warriors.

I’m with you in feeling that the one blessing of the housing bust was the cessation of this indiscriminate building in some of our most naturally beautiful areas.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter] Eavesdropper,

What in the world are the planning commissions thinking when they allow these horribly ugly monstrosities?

We have the exact same problem here, although they are tearing down post-war bungalow or ranch-style homes here, not the nice, historical buildings you have. Nice neighborhoods with simple, comfortable, single-story homes and tree-lined streets are giving way to tiny lots devoid of any established vegetation and ugly, intrusive, boxy structures. I wish they’d do something about this trend. Maybe the end of the bubble can mean the end of destroying old neighborhoods for the benefit of spec builders. We can hope![/quote]

You’re assuming that the people on the planning commissions are not only folks of aesthetic taste and refinement, but are incapable of taking bribes. And I think there was a bit of that going on during the housing boom.

As for your post-war bungalows vs. our nice historical buildings, I think we’re probably on the same page in believing that there can be beauty in any structure, regardless of the cost, just as we’ve learned how much bad taste money can buy. Some of my favorite neighborhoods here are in the small peninsulas that line the Chesapeake Bay. You can drive thru the streets, and see these delightful cottages from the 30s, bungalows from the 40s, and ranchers from the 50s. They’re anywhere from 650 to 1100 square feet, and the 50s and early 60s houses are sometimes painted in their original hues of aqua blue or salmon pink. They were built as homes for some of the workmen in the fishing and boating industries in these parts, or as modest summer weekend getaways for harried DC lawyers and white-collar government workers. They’re not going to be featured on the pages of Architectural Digest, but many of them have simple lines that, paired with the mature landscaping and the rock jettys, driftwood, and beaches of the Bay hearken back to a time when a house was shelter for your family, and not an exercise in trying to impress your family and outspend your friends.

There were so many of these charming little communities in these parts prior to the boom, before everybody and his brother decided they just had to have a beach house. Planning commissions stood by idly (or else they were counting their money) while horrendous oversized McMansions went up on teeny little beach lots beside the jury-rigged do-it-yourself structures that were erected by guys who fancied themselves weekend home construction warriors.

I’m with you in feeling that the one blessing of the housing bust was the cessation of this indiscriminate building in some of our most naturally beautiful areas.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter] Eavesdropper,

What in the world are the planning commissions thinking when they allow these horribly ugly monstrosities?

We have the exact same problem here, although they are tearing down post-war bungalow or ranch-style homes here, not the nice, historical buildings you have. Nice neighborhoods with simple, comfortable, single-story homes and tree-lined streets are giving way to tiny lots devoid of any established vegetation and ugly, intrusive, boxy structures. I wish they’d do something about this trend. Maybe the end of the bubble can mean the end of destroying old neighborhoods for the benefit of spec builders. We can hope![/quote]

You’re assuming that the people on the planning commissions are not only folks of aesthetic taste and refinement, but are incapable of taking bribes. And I think there was a bit of that going on during the housing boom.

As for your post-war bungalows vs. our nice historical buildings, I think we’re probably on the same page in believing that there can be beauty in any structure, regardless of the cost, just as we’ve learned how much bad taste money can buy. Some of my favorite neighborhoods here are in the small peninsulas that line the Chesapeake Bay. You can drive thru the streets, and see these delightful cottages from the 30s, bungalows from the 40s, and ranchers from the 50s. They’re anywhere from 650 to 1100 square feet, and the 50s and early 60s houses are sometimes painted in their original hues of aqua blue or salmon pink. They were built as homes for some of the workmen in the fishing and boating industries in these parts, or as modest summer weekend getaways for harried DC lawyers and white-collar government workers. They’re not going to be featured on the pages of Architectural Digest, but many of them have simple lines that, paired with the mature landscaping and the rock jettys, driftwood, and beaches of the Bay hearken back to a time when a house was shelter for your family, and not an exercise in trying to impress your family and outspend your friends.

There were so many of these charming little communities in these parts prior to the boom, before everybody and his brother decided they just had to have a beach house. Planning commissions stood by idly (or else they were counting their money) while horrendous oversized McMansions went up on teeny little beach lots beside the jury-rigged do-it-yourself structures that were erected by guys who fancied themselves weekend home construction warriors.

I’m with you in feeling that the one blessing of the housing bust was the cessation of this indiscriminate building in some of our most naturally beautiful areas.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=CA renter] Eavesdropper,

What in the world are the planning commissions thinking when they allow these horribly ugly monstrosities?

We have the exact same problem here, although they are tearing down post-war bungalow or ranch-style homes here, not the nice, historical buildings you have. Nice neighborhoods with simple, comfortable, single-story homes and tree-lined streets are giving way to tiny lots devoid of any established vegetation and ugly, intrusive, boxy structures. I wish they’d do something about this trend. Maybe the end of the bubble can mean the end of destroying old neighborhoods for the benefit of spec builders. We can hope![/quote]

You’re assuming that the people on the planning commissions are not only folks of aesthetic taste and refinement, but are incapable of taking bribes. And I think there was a bit of that going on during the housing boom.

As for your post-war bungalows vs. our nice historical buildings, I think we’re probably on the same page in believing that there can be beauty in any structure, regardless of the cost, just as we’ve learned how much bad taste money can buy. Some of my favorite neighborhoods here are in the small peninsulas that line the Chesapeake Bay. You can drive thru the streets, and see these delightful cottages from the 30s, bungalows from the 40s, and ranchers from the 50s. They’re anywhere from 650 to 1100 square feet, and the 50s and early 60s houses are sometimes painted in their original hues of aqua blue or salmon pink. They were built as homes for some of the workmen in the fishing and boating industries in these parts, or as modest summer weekend getaways for harried DC lawyers and white-collar government workers. They’re not going to be featured on the pages of Architectural Digest, but many of them have simple lines that, paired with the mature landscaping and the rock jettys, driftwood, and beaches of the Bay hearken back to a time when a house was shelter for your family, and not an exercise in trying to impress your family and outspend your friends.

There were so many of these charming little communities in these parts prior to the boom, before everybody and his brother decided they just had to have a beach house. Planning commissions stood by idly (or else they were counting their money) while horrendous oversized McMansions went up on teeny little beach lots beside the jury-rigged do-it-yourself structures that were erected by guys who fancied themselves weekend home construction warriors.

I’m with you in feeling that the one blessing of the housing bust was the cessation of this indiscriminate building in some of our most naturally beautiful areas.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jstoesz][quote]eavesdropper, your NJ Mcmansion is simply gaudy. It’s like an impersonal “cavern” with a few choice “empty” built-ins. It may as well be showcased on “Jersey Shore,” a favorite party-animal show of the current HS set.

CAR, you MUST review the link below. I think you would really appreciate all the love that went into true, authentic mid-century design. This architect is now deceased, but his voluminous works live on in SoCal.

http://www.modernsandiego.com/SimBruceRi…

His first house for his family IS STILL for sale in Pt. Loma:

http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-100031293-97…

I realize this home is not located in your area of interest but Sim Bruce Richards was one of the original “taliesins” of Frank Lloyd Wright (apprentices). There are a few more like him throughout the country but it takes a special buyer to appreciate all the work that has gone into the design of these homes!

Here’s another local link to peruse for local mid-century modern architecture. Enjoy!!

http://www.merceryork.com/
[/quote] I badly want that sim bruce richards house…everything about it is awesome. I have been salivating over that for months, but there is no way that is in my price range!

Kind of a stupid thing to comment on but those over-sized door pulls are awesome.[/quote]

Yummy!! What I really find incredible is how “intact” it appears to be. And the door pulls ARE awesome.

It’d be great to get into that place, and spruce it up a bit. The wood would look spectacular with some reconditioning. I’d definitely get rid of the ’80s fluorescent light fixture in the kitchen, and would find a vintage gas range of that era. Some mid-century furnishings in a cohesive design. A landscaping re-do, and that place would take your breath away.

However, the John Mortenson house (1964’s Hyndman residence in La Mesa) captured my heart. I have a real fixation on rooflines – probably as a result of seeing so many of those multiple-roofline monstrosities built since 1995. But his are absolutely stunning. There are any number of his houses that I’d love to have.

Oh, and thanks much, bearishgirl, for sending us those websites!

[Author]

Posts