"I think the "Mc" in McMansion relates to the predictability--each one is just like the other one, which is fine in fast food burgers, not so great in housing, at least to my mind. I do think of large but builder's grade."

Bingo! We have a very dear friend who lives a "McMansion" development. He purchased it between 8-9 years ago for over $900,000. When I walk into his house, for that money I expect to find custom hinges and hardware from an upscale reproduction company, not off the shelf from HD or Lowe's. You'll find that in my house. I don't expect to find it in his but alas, there it is.

"To me, the epitome of a McMansion is newish house selling for over 700k (in my area), but the builders only bothered to brick the FRONT of the house."

Another example of the "dumbing down" of quality in workmanship. Oh yes, let's just brick the front of the house and side the rest and no one will notice or care how ridiculous it looks.
I do have to say that in my friend's development there is a lovely "McMansion" that is modular built. The whole exterior is bricked-faced and it looks gorgeous. It reminds me of an old stately home and could fit somewhere on some acreage in a "real" wealthier neighborhood...we're not talking about in a development.

Besides the use of lower grade hardware, why on earth would anyone want to look at very nice rustic Spanish-style tiles in a powder room when the toilet and sink are delicate, almost Victoria-styled. To top it off, there's the mish mosh of fixtures, again from HD or Lowe's. Doesn't anyone (I'm talking builders here) even think or care that maybe there should be some cohesion when designing and putting together a kitchen or bathroom? Don't even get me started on the lousy layout of my friend's kitchen and the hodgepodge of "stuff" stuck in there. I'm not talking about the very lovely European blending of different types of cabinets and hardware that you see in fine homes, but the general lack of regard for what is aesthetically pleasing. So many textures, so many roof lines, so many different finishes making it all look like a jumbled and poorly thought out mess.
I'm convinced men have designed the majority of these houses and care not a whit about design integrity, but only care about making a fast buck.

That's my perception of the McMansion.

Pesky1 has described my community to a "T".

I live at the foot of a 15K ft picturesque mountain where lots of retirees have come to buy these monstrosities. There is a golf course development called "The Resort" that is full of these over-built homes. My biggest complaint? Most of these don't even face the mountain! It would be like building a home on the ocean but not having any of the picture windows face the beach. The homes are built regardless of the lot or the view. There is more than one that has the GARAGES facing the mountain. I guess those hummers and that big boat need the view, not the people.

But my favorite horrible house was a gigantic log-cabinish montrosity (it's the mountains, our McMansions are often faux-log cabins). The front is humongous with a large two-door entrance flanked on either side by two enormous, ENORMOUS (maybe 10 feet wide by 20 feed high!), symmetrical arched windows. Lovely, right?

Wrong.

The front walkway from the driveway goes right past one of these windows. What was inside that window? Yep. The guest powder room, well, the only bathroom located on that floor and the one anyone hanging out in the public areas of the house would use. The toilet was located right in front of this enormous window. The window took up one entire wall of this bathroom All I could see was sitting on that toilet while the UPS man dropped off my deliveries. The other window was THE window for the major public area of the house. None of it faced the mountain...the back bedroom windows, not even the master bedroom, faced the mountain.

How would one possibly do symmetrical window treatments for these two arched windows? They are architecturally symmetrical, but their purposes would prohibit window treatments that could serve both. The arched window was so large I wondered what attractive window treatment it could possibly have that would provide necessary privacy.

If you had a dinner party, you'd want these windows opened and the lights from inside to shine out beckoning guests to enter. But that would be impossible.

The inside of the house had no relationship to the outside. Simply awful.

Lukkish I'm sorry if you feel I was putting words in your mouth as that was not my intent, nor do I understand where that was done. I asked you a question after you stated what was acceptable in a house size. So what would you do with the big ones? Are doonies and my homes tear down material to you given you have determined that 4000 is max for anyone to live in???? Honestly, what would you do with the homes that are too big in your book?????

people choose to brick only the fronts because that is what is included with their facade....to brick the entire house is an option so ridiculously overpriced that most people choose not to-whether they can afford to or not!!(that is with these big national cookie cutter builders...)

In my original post I said the property costs about thirty thousand and the house costs about thirty thousand to build. I meant to say, the property was three hundred thousand and another three hundred thousand to build.

I've lived in a 1926 Tudor, approx 1400 square feet, including the basement. And I loved the facade, the extensive and beautiful woodwork, and the way that the outside of the house fit the inside, and gave clear clues to the "appropriate" way to decorate the home.

But, the neighborhood got seedy. As in two weeks after we moved out, there were news stories about several bodies being found in various dumpsters, and one just out on someone's lawn (how does that even happen???) And the electical was ancient. The beautiful windows were drafty. The plumbing was ancient. And city codes pretty much prohibited doing anything piecemeal - no you can't just replumb the bath - they only give permits for the entire house or nothing. The lots were small and the house was much of the lot. These houses were built in the 20s and 30s and small, so I don't think they were McMansions of that time.

We moved to a 2700 square foot home in the suburbs. The facade is bland. There are four or five house "styles" in my immediate neighborhood. None of them are attempting to imitate a Victorian or a Colonial or any other label that I can think of - they're various versions of blah.

But....the neighborhood is much safer. No bodies found on the lawn or in a dumpster. The schools are better. I can have a bedroom for each of my children AND room for a home office for myself and my husband. I chose to make tradeoffs. And that's likely what most McMansion owners are doing too.

I think that many people would love to have a home that fit their needs/wants for neighborhood, size, style/craftsmanship, and budget. Sometimes you can't get everything. For the increase in price between my old house and new, I could have totally renovated the old house. I still would have had a crummy neighborhood, a teeny lot, and a dysfunctional kitchen (four exits + hot water radiators = little counter/cupboard space.) And 1400 less square feet.

The problem with people buying what they cannot afford goes well beyond McMansions. There are a lot more foreclosures in my old neighborhood of beautiful, character-filled, affordable homes than in my current blah neighborhood.

I could have bought a custom home on a large lot for what I paid for mine....if I was willing to live more than an hour from work. I hate commuting with a passion, so that was not a good option for me.

I could have bought something built with more charm and design "integrity" but that would have cost another $100,000 or so in any of the neighborhoods that met our needs. That would have been foolish for my family, as maybe we'd be part of the foreclosure crisis now.

I think this thread is heated because most people with "blah" homes (regardless of size) didn't buy them just to annoy the neighbors, or just to have 8 extra and unused rooms to "show off" with. They made tradeoffs that seemed to work best for their family.

If for some reason we needed to get a bigger house (I can't imagine why, but something could happen) I could see myself building what some have termed a McMansion. I would love to build, just so I could choose a @#$%@#$ wall paint color without my husband insisting that what's there is fine.

My home is built in a neighborhood of single story Ranch style homes. Each home is on a piece of property measuring 100 X 75 ft. The McMansion builders would buy one or two properties on the street and build a house with a footprint that was 10ft from the front curb, 15ft from the back property line, and a two to three ft easement from the property line on each side. They are two to three story with high ceilings. The outside looked like it was designed by a grade school kid. They don't fit with the other houses in the neighborhood. They look huge and stupid.

I'm at 3000 sq ft so avoid the labeling...but I would love to have a McMansion as it would give me more rooms and wall space to decorate...LOL!!! Is that sick or what:-) Can't afford it...barely make my own payments. Repeating humbly "there's no place like home, there's no place like home, there's no place like home."

Igloo - The comments in my post may not be popular but they are true. Are there people who need larger homes? Sure, of course. Are you one of them, I have no clue, only you can answer that. Is your home a McMansion? Probably not considering it isn't a new build on a tiny lot and built out of shoddy materials to look like something it isn't. However if you had read my post completely through you'd see it also says

"And its not about buying large Victorian home that's a 100 years old and 8 billion sf either."

Which I specifically said because I've been around long enough to know you'd chime in.

Meangoose, (you're not all that mean, are you?) you just articulated so beautifully what I was trying to say on Palimpsest's thread about Needs, Perceived needs, Culture.

Rather than sounding so pathetic, like I "settled," I meant to convey thoughts similar to yours about trade-offs.

Yes, I too live in a blah, suburban house. I too, used to live in a golden oldie full of character. You & I both appreciate charming, old houses, but needed to make choices weighing a number of issues when we bought the second time around.

We are in similar situations, I think.

In my opinion, it boils down to "live and let live." Whereas I am free to think your house is a "McMansion," you're free to think my house is a "McShoe box." Once I remind myself of that fact, I am not so keen on continuing the discussion!

But having said this, it is an interesting issue and I am glad Natal brought it to our attention.

I do think its sad when a charming old home is torn down to make way for a huge monstrosity that takes up most of the lot. Especially when it is in an established older neighborhood with a mix of homes of different older styles. There are many in my neck of the woods in NJ. There is one right around the corner from me, and it sticks out like a sore thumb. The builders who build them don't really care about integrity of neighborhoods, or the environmental impact these homes have, they only care about the almighty dollar, and how much profit they can make.
Larger new construction homes are not for everyone, just as old victorians, and old cottages or colonials or bungalows with ancient plumbing and electric aren't for everyone. Everyone has the right to choose what is best for them. Mcmansions are surely not my style, and if they truly are falling out of favor, I will not be sad to see them not popping up in my neighborhood.

It's become apparent that there are several trains of thought as to what a McMansion actually is, and the discussion is suffering for it. Sheer size and blandness is not the same thing as replacing a cottage and ruining the feel of a neighborhood. They might be related sometimes, but they aren't the same thing.

So I went to find more definitions ... from Word Spy:

McMansion: A large, opulent house, especially a new house that has a size and style that doesn't fit in with the surrounding houses.

Note: The word McMansion has only been a part of the lexicon for a little over ten years, but it has already undergone a fairly significant change in meaning. In fact, the word's current meaning seems to be almost the opposite of its original sense. As the earliest citation shows, McMansion used to mean something similar to cookie-cutter house (that is, a house that has a bland style that's identical to all the nearby houses). This fits nicely with the formation of the word, which is McDonalds (the fast-food chain) + mansion. After all, what could be more bland and "cookie cutter" than the fare served by McDonalds?

Which totally explains some of the miscommunication in this thread. I would be testy about building houses that don't fit with the neighborhood, too. But I'm not testy about people who move into a builder neighborhood full of large bland houses.

.to brick the entire house is an option so ridiculously overpriced that most people choose not to-whether they can afford to or not!!(that is with these big national cookie cutter builders...)

Bricking a large house is a long and tedious project. Skilled brickmasons do a good job and, imo, it is not overpriced. (At least what we paid to have our house bricked was not overpriced - wasn't cheap, but you get what you pay for.)

To brick or not to brick...that is the question.

My thought is to equate it to getting dressed. Would you go out with only your undergarments and a shirt on, neglecting to put on either a skirt or slacks? Nope, didn't think so.

I agree with allison0704. Any job, big or small, do it well or not at all.

Lukkish I did catch that childish remark but was ignoring it on purpose since it wasn't necessary in this conversation. Really it was beneeth you and I assumed it was a momentary lapse in judgement.

God forbid that someone who lives in a large house wants to contribute to the conversation about large homes. Given you decided sq footage was the determination of a necessary home size I don't think it's strange that someone in a larger home might want to counter your arguments by explaining why they live in the size home they do. Perhaps in defining excessive home size you have also determined thread contribution size?

Please people, if your home is 4001 and above or maybe 3001 and above, your comments are not welcome :oP

By the way, there is no national defination of an excessive home size. While some communities have made rules in regards to home size (most add restrictions or covanents on the buildings to increase efficiency or fit within local lot use standards) these vary by community and are significantly different. In many communities I have worked in a 1000 sq ft house is the mansion of the community and less than 4 people living in it would be deemed rediculously inappropriate when the neighbor is in 600 sq ft with 12 to 16 people in the home. It's all relative.

This is a simplistic point in a thread that is more about a "culture" but I would rather see a house built honestly out of concrete block -- or all vinyl siding for that matter, than a house that only has better materials on the front and cheapens when you turn the first corner. Part of the phenomenon is houses trying to look like something they are really not.

Which totally explains some of the miscommunication in this thread. I would be testy about building houses that don't fit with the neighborhood, too. But I'm not testy about people who move into a builder neighborhood full of large bland houses.

I couldn't care less about a development of McMansions, but I hate it when they pop up in old, established neighborhoods.

I do think that a McMansion is more about appearances than reality and flaunting money rather than exhibiting taste. Not everyone has the same taste, but much of what is built now is abominable-banana split houses with brick, stone, stucco, and siding on one building not to mention other ostentatious elements.

A Mcmansion also does impact other homes in a neighborhood when it is built in place of another smaller home and now takes up almost the entire lot. We have some in our neighborhood that make the house next door look almost like a child's playhouse (disclaimer: this is an fairly well-to-do neighborhood with good-sized homes, ours being one of the smaller ones). The new houses were built on a lot that had one large home and now has six homes which are close enough together that I bet the owners could string a clothesline between them. In some cases, the sunlight and tree cover from old oaks once shared is now taken up and/or destoyed because someone feels the need to build a big "look at me" house. The "60 Minutes" segment showed one man saying people in the neighborhood were jealous or couldn't afford to renovate. That is another misconception that many of these folks have. We bought our home (~2000 sq.ft 1960 ranch including the basement) precisely because it was a small, well-built house on a large lot (large that is for the DC area-half acre) with lots of trees. We were watching my parents struggle up and down stairs in their large place in PA and wanted to be in a place that could eventually work for one-level living when we got to that point. We have renovated over the years and will continue to do so as needed.

I think the definition of excessive home size is when your house impacts your neighbor's enjoyment of his/her space whether inside or outside. I do not want to look out and see your looming wall right on my property line. I do not want to lose my morning or afternoon sun because your new home blocks it. I am very careful to be a good neighbor and I would appreciate that in others. If you want such a huge house, find a place with a large lot.

I agree 100% with Pal about the materials thing. Some of the houses being built also have plastic interior doors, for example, and shoddy workmanship if you look closely, but, wow-granite countertops. It is absolutely trying to look like something you are not.

Mrsmarv, I had to laugh when you said men design the majority of houses. How true!

When we were building on and rebuilding the rest of the house, our builder, who is VERY good by the way, kept insisting we should put in carpet instead of wood, told me I should stain the cabinets instead of painting them white. He didn't think beadboard was a good idea. And said we REALLY should paint the kitchen and DR wall green, my least favorite color.

But he was so used to building the "standard" home in the City that everyone has. When all was said and done he was amazed at my choices.

This city builder wasn't used to doing exactly what the WOMAN wanted! I also think a lot of it had to do with him never building a home in the country before where design and colors are much different than in the City.

i agree!! a beautiful, all brick house is gorgeous.
however, when it sits in a large neighborhood of large, "mcmansion" type homes built by a huge national builder and 99% of the homeowners do not choose the "all-brick" option, it is an option most people forego...the markup our big builder put on the all brick option was definitely quite a bit higher than if we contacted a mason to brick our home...it was a much different experience than when we dealt with a smaller custom builder in a couple of other areas...

these neighborhoods are often transient.... when you purchase a home knowing it'll be yours for 3-8 yrs, your mindset changes and you prioritize for the short term and resale and a beautiful kitchen trumps all-brick usually!!

Most builders do not choose colors, finishes, etc. They usually have a design person who does that.

Before building our home, we visited a parade of home where there was a house designed by a woman. Her husband was the general contractor. We loved it. We both commented on her use of space, especially in the kitchen/bath/laundry areas.

I agree with Allison regarding the brick. We went through 3 brick masons before getting the job done right and finished. It is not cheap, nor do you want someone who is not skilled working on your home.

I don't see many of the McMansion type homes in this area, maybe in one part of the city I am near, but I live outside city limits, in a rural area. I am more thankful for that after reading this thread LOL.

tina

Interesting topic ... I agree with demifloyd's definition ..."What comes to mind is street after street that looks the same, same two trees in the front yard, same landscaping, same houseplans, all large homes built too close to the street, with very little space inbetween the homes, sometimes with roofs almost touching.

Usually these homes have a few "impressive" features--like lots of crown moulding, hardwood floors and granite, but have very little individual character." Cherry kitchens with stainless appliances and granite counters ...

Here the McMansions are being built in previously farmed fields, and the thing that you notice the most on these houses are the garages .... since that's all you see in the front of the house. And they are all squished together with little room between them, and there are empty fields behind them???

Igloochic, your gorgeous home was probably considered at it's time with the same feeling as the McMansions of today are ... but it has good materials and character that the McMansions of today do not.

I also live in a home that I know is too large for myself and my furkids ... 2500 sq ft. But my parents gifted me a 600 sq. ft. bedroom addition to the first floor so they could visit while they were able. Eventually I will be able to live only on the first floor and close up the upstairs, so will really live in approx. 1900 sq feet. Probably still too much for one person ... that's OK.

And I bought the property because of the 20 acres, so I wouldn't have to worry too much about any McMansion subdivisions crowding me ... and my town requires 5 acre lots at minimum. My forever home that I've lived in for 13+ years so far ...

There is nothing wrong with exhibiting taste and wealth, per se, I don't think. It's that McMansions do it the wrong way.

I don't know how many of you are familiar with Cleveland, but there are some magnificent enclaves of "old wealth" here, which I'm sure is similar in many older northern cities.

You drive through them and it just blows your mind how beautiful everything is...big trees, beautiful homes with a ton of character and being kept up very well...perfect grass...

Whether it's in an urban neighborhood like Shaker Heights or "exurban" like Gates Mills, these houses are simply gorgeous, unique, and a wonderful show of what money AND TASTE can get you.

Driving through McMansion "enclaves" is not nearly as nice an experience. It's an ostentatious and untasteful display of wealth. The landscaping is not done properly, the houses and neighborhoods are not to scale.

If I were going to spend 500,000 on a home here in this area (in Cleveland that can buy you a TON), I'd much rather choose a tasteful, medium sized beautiful house in a wealthy enclave with taste than a comparatively larger and more gaudy new construction McMansion heaven.

There's a reason that "old money" looks down upon "new money". And it makes a lot of sense.

I don't think it makes sense to "look down" on anyone.

Thank you, demifloyd. That's what has been bugging me about this entire thread (both of them).

I am a long time lurker on this wonderful site. Very rarely do I post anything. However, I must say that I would LOVE to have a hugh house! Even though I live in a nice 2500 square foot traditional home with just my husband and dog, if I ever won the lottery, one of the first things I would do is to build/buy a very large home. Not because I need the space or want to impress the neighbors, but simply because I love large homes. That being said, I will never win the lottery so I don't forsee that McMansion in my future. But, I will never be critical of those that do have them. After all, it IS THEIR money!

(both of them)

???

igloo - get over it...tisk tisk...

Tina, I realize that builders have a design team. But our builder was doing it on his own with no design team. He thought he was guiding me in picking things out thinking I wanted to have the standard cookie-cutter interior as the houses he built. Some carpet, some wood floor...the usual.

What we did was take a modernish style house and transformed it to look old. Never in his life had he done it before. I think he thought we were nuts. lol. But the best compliment was when it was almost finished and one of the workers asked us if this was our parent's house. Loved it!

I also agree with Allison about the brick. I never thought much of it until we hired "real" masons to do our fireplace and put "real" stone on it and on the outside of the house. Watching the precision cutting was amazing. The FP alone cost an arm and a leg, but I wouldn't have done it any other way.

In fact, I was so clueless as to what materials people built homes with that I had no idea there was fake stone! Give me real stone and brick or nothing at all. OTOH, I also like siding. :)

Even though I don't care for mcmansions, I think if I had the opportunity, I would put one of those walk in huge closets for my bedroom. My home is a 1905 cottage, do you all know how small closets were made back then?? Thank goodness for the as seen on TV shoes under bed storage- LOL

Both of them = both threads about this.

So it comes around again that there can't be a discussion about culture that people can express disagreeing viewpoints without someone either being accused of looking down upon someone or being afraid that someone is looking down upon someone else. Welcome to the class system--the most class conscious people in America are the ones who maintain it doesnt exist. I am perfectly content with the fact that plenty of people think they are much better than I am, so what? And vice versa, I am not kidding myself.

The best way to disagree with the entire topic of a thread is to ignore it so it disappears.imo.

Yeah, Palimpsest, people can't have an opinion.

I'm horrified by "brick-front" yet my house is sided in asbestos-cement!

Welcome to the class system--the most class conscious people in America are the ones who maintain it doesnt exist. I am perfectly content with the fact that plenty of people think they are much better than I am, so what? And vice versa, I am not kidding myself.

Another amen!

Maureen, ours is too, but we liked the shingles so much we opted to match them with the new cement version when we added on. Good insulation and paint lasts forever! ;)

Stinky -gardener, you're probably right about us being in similar situations. I can't imagine that there are a whole lot of people that don't have to make some sort of compromise.

I guess I'm lucky in the sense that there was a neighborhood of blah houses that otherwise met my requirements. That way, none of my neighbors are giving me the stink-eye for my tasteless box - they have one too.

I live in MN, in a suburb of Minneapolis. There's another suburb here that I would *love* to live in, but at the time we were looking, we couldn't really even get into a shoebox there.

That suburb has some actual mansions, some very charming homes built in the 20s-30s, and some McMansions.

I can see why someone in a charming 20s home in that suburb would be annoyed when someone buys a neighboring home, tears it down, and builds a much bigger, less charming home.

I can also see why someone would make a perfectly rational decision to do so. People make tradeoffs. Will I build a house that maybe looks silly on the lot so I can have the size I want for me, and the school district I want for my kids? That answer is yes for some people.

It's hard to accept that we cannot control the decisions made by other property owners. Different things annoy different people. Personally, I probably wouldn't care if someone built a McMansion next door to me (even if my house was as charming as my former Tudor).

But if I got to impose my own "covenents" on my neighborhood to maximize my own enjoyment, it would be illegal for anyone to let their dog outside unless there was a responsible adult out there with the dog. Yes, even in fenced yards. The dogs that bark all day at anything that moves....they decrease my enjoyment of my property. The dogs that escape, because they can jump the fence or because a kid leaves the gate open - same thing.

The point here isn't a debate about dogs. My point is - communities have to set limits on how much "say" we can have on other people's property. Otherwise I can't build a big ugly house and you can't have a dog.

Someone posted something to the effect of "if you want a bigger house, go get a bigger lot" (presumably NIMBY). The corollary to that would be "if you want to be able to restrict the size/type of home a neighboring property owner can build, buy the property yourself" or perhaps "only buy in neighborhoods that have already established covenants to the effect."

"Welcome to the class system--the most class conscious people in America are the ones who maintain it doesnt exist."

Um, did that happen here? (Did someone say class doesn't exist?)

So how do all you guys square with the 578 million dollar school in LA?

Did you see the housing numbers today? I am so glad so many of you are happy with the destruction of the so called " mcmansions". The new home numbers where awful. I'm so glad you can celebrate the destrucion of our economy.

Have you considered in the north, that a 2,000 sq. ft. home turns into a potential 4,000 sq ft. home in areas where a basement could be redone? This is not an option in other parts of the country.

I am so sorry for this site is not being used for everyday people discussing decorating. Instead, it has been hijacked by people using it for a political agenda.

This is not about taste, we all know everone will say "do what you like" But, it is about people having private propery. We need to make all private propery part of the governement? right?

Very interesting postings. I was once on a "less is more" roll (I had read all of Susanka's books) and planned on bumping out the back of our 1979 , 2400 sf tract Garrison Colonial to give us much needed breathing space for our kitchen and eating area (18x10 altogether) . However, the costs for the addition were prohibitive (to me), over $300/sf BEFORE accounting for appliances and cabinetry. I asked the contractors to estimate for a single room addition, just a breakfast room, so that the kitchen could be expanded into the current breakfast room, but the prices were even higher per sf. So now I am faced with remodeling the kitchen in the existing footage or taking the money we would have spent on the addition and trading up to one of the "McMansions" three blocks up the street. The "McMansions" are 3200-3700 sf and were built in the 90's. Some are prettier than others. Their kitchen/eating areas are about the size I'd like, and are 20 years newer than my existing kitchen, so I wouldn't have to remodel. I like the fact that they have mudrooms, first floor offices, and 9 foot ceilings on the first floor. So now my thoughts have shifted to "value for the dollars" rather than "living well in a small space". Of course, my current home is tract housing, albeit well-built, so these newer home have finishes that are generally a little nicer than what I currently have. In my area these larger homes run about $650-750k, and sit on 1/3 acre, so there are still nice sized yards.

Not all of us can afford or want architectural integrity and bricked homes on all sides. We are just balancing our needs with our finances, and our priorities. As someone else said above, for me, a nice functional kitchen will beat out brick on all sides every time.

As to the size of the lots, I like that they're still close enough together that the kids can trick or treat door to door, and that neighbors can talk to each other from their porches. They are established communities with many families living there for many years.

That said, my husband is doing that "here I die" thing when the subject of moving comes up, so the McMansion may only be in my dreams, LOL.

Just some thoughts from someone who was once a "not so big house" snob.

Interestingly, the economies that are booming (india and china) are copying US style mcmansion-cookie-cutter gated communities :)

They used to have individually designed architectural homes, now they want the mass produced tract homes and high rises !

I guess wealth brings the middle class into dreaming big, i mean 5000sqft-for-3-people big :)

As for the 'brick and stone' comment, the price would be over-inflated if you were to build in an area where those materials are not used regularly, such as CA. When I built in TX, both material were standard to my home, as they are in almost every home in the Austin area, as well as TX in general.

Just my 2 cents, but not all Mc M. are created equal. There are spec homes, as well as the true custom builds, and if large enough, a *true* Mc M. The others I would classify as typical cookie cutter 'big houses' or wannabe Mc M.

Where I come from, a very large home left by wealthy parents to a family member, was usually considered a mansion. *That*, IMO, was considered class, as well as being respected people in the community who worked hard to get such a house. Hollywood/Beverly Hills....have things changed! ;o)

We are guilty of knocking down a 1940's ranch and building a 3800 square foot house on an acre. Yes, it's much larger than the older homes, but it's not a McM but a custom home with high end finishes.

Do we need 3800 square feet? No, but it's nice to finally have a closet.Lol. Most of our new neighbors love our home, except one but you can't make everyone happy.
Not all large homes are McM.
Not everyone who builds a large home does it show off. I don't care what anyone else thinks. In fact, I custom built b/c I like simpler finishes. I didn't want crown moulding.
Not everyone with a large home is living beyond their means.

But for the most part I agree with the sentiment on this thread. I'd rather live in an older, smaller home with a shorter commute than a McM with an hour commute and that is exactly the choice we made when bought our first home.

Meangoose, I enjoyed & appreciated your reply.

Yes, I agree, many people have to compromise out there, for one reason or another. I should add, though, that your "attitude" about it is healthy & mature. I aspire to be healthy & mature also. Thanks for the good example. If you look at the "other" similar thread you can witness some of my less mature thoughts on the subject of falling values.

Mature thought: It is what it is. See, I can do it too!

Someone was just telling me that we can keep a "running inventory" of all things that make us feel desperate, or we can tell ourselves a "new story" about our circumstances. Yes, I choose to tell myself a new, less anxiety provoking story.

Like: It was all meant to unfold just as it did, & I'm meant to roll with it.

To me, "McMansion" is to "Mansion" (as in, the Biltmore or even your average a Victorian mansion) like a Big Mac is to fine dining. Sprinkle the bun with sesame seeds, slather it with "special sauce", leave a peek of bland, green iceburg lettuce hanging over the edge, it's still just a pre-formed, fatty beef patty on white bread.

Sure, you can "live large" in the McMansion, the same way you can get full on the essentially empty calories of a Big Mac. But if aesthetics and style and taste actually matter to you, you'll find it hard to be happy with an oversized tract house. That's because deep down, even though it's been fattened up with granite counter tops, Palladium windows in the bathroom and SS appliances and supersized to the point that even the dog can have his own room, you suspect that it's still not worth the money. It's also why, despite her defense of the people who do do buy the oversized tract houses commonly known as McMansions, igloochic does not live in one. Deep down, she knows better. Hers is the real thing ;^)

This thread is like deja vu!

I predict that this is going to be one of those threads where people in small homes defend their small size and people in large homes defend theirs.

Someone will post how wasteful it is to have a large home when much smaller worked for them. It uses too many resources, you don't need that space, it is ostentatious!

Someone else will say if I can afford it then who are you to tell me otherwise. You are all jealous, I don't come to your house and tell you how to live, if you can't afford a big house then don't buy one!

Telling someone their home is out of style is akin to saying their baby is ugly. No good will come of it! Just walk away! Walk away!

So true, Littledog! Very creatively said!

Ditto, dgmarie...& very funny.

All I ask is, why??

LOL Little dog :) I of course know that this home is more than an inflated tract home, but I guess I was trying to say that this home was once the talk of the town in all the wrong ways, just as the mcmansions are here :) It was considered too plain, too big and ate up too much of it's lot. Now no one complained it was too big for two people of course...because back in the day that was fine, but it was too big for the neighborhood, which consisted of three small and gorgeous victorian homes. This place blocked those homes views as well as their light and we won't even discuss the outbuildings, which included a five story tower right in front of their living room :)

In this thread there are so many definations of what a mcmansion owner is and what their house is that you could easily attribute the lable to many homes and their owners. I for one prefer not to cast stones. People love their homes, large and small and I don't think it's right to disparage them for doing so.

According to a short article in AOL Finance, not a single *new *build priced over $750,000 sold in July. (They termed these McMansions in the article, but in many areas it would buy a well -built mansion and in some other areas a condo so take that with a grain of salt.)

1000 *new *builds in the $500K-$750K were sold

80% of *new *builds sold in Julu were under $300K.

Interestingly enough, the local record for a house was reached in my city this summer at slightly under $6M.
There are currently 3 properties on the market within spitting distance of my place in the $4M-$6M range. And I don't live in the best neighborhood in the city.

I wish I had time to read through all the responses in this thread. I'm not sure what (or if there is) the general concensus is but I'll add my two cents.

As empty nesters, DH and I built the home we thought we "should" have a few years ago...hated it. Rebuilt what might be considered a "McMansion" (though not on a small lot)...love it and use all the spaces. Due to the energy conservation measures we took while building, heating costs are reasonable and, since we have no need for a/c, no energy costs in summer months.