Goodbye McMansions and hello smaller homes?

the Mcmansion/ego house era is over for now....

seeing the end of Mcmansions would be a beautiful thing. Not because they are large, per se, but because they are ugly and poorly built. I can't believe anyone catches sight of a fake brick front and vinyl siding and thinks - I have to have this. I'd say appearance over substance except for the appearance is awful... (for examples, look at just about anything built by Toll brothers)

Nobody liked the McMansions, except the people who kept building/buying them.

It is way to early to celebrate... Those people are still around, and lots of them still have plenty of money :(

Charles - agree 100%. McMansions main problem is that they are ugly!!!! Also, they take up every sq inch of land. If you have enough land, they are not bad. A 4000 sq ft home on 5000 sq lot looks terrible!!!

McMansions are the real estate equivalent of the Griswold family station wagon, both in terms of quality and aesthetics. For the culturally illiterate:

“The Wagon Queen Family Truckster is a fictional station wagon created specifically for the 1983 comedy National Lampoon's Vacation. The Truckster is based on a Ford LTD Country Squire station wagon that has been heavily modified.

The car was designed by George Barris (famous for other Hollywood custom cars such as the Batmobile, the Monkeemobile, and many others) and was deliberately designed in bad taste as an absolutely ridiculous station wagon, and as over-the-top as possible. The Truckster features overdone wood paneling, eight headlights (four on each side in a rectangular cluster), a grille area largely covered by bodywork having only two small openings close to the bumper, (similar to that of a 1982 Oldsmobile Toronado) a separate oil cooler grille (but had no oil cooler), large chrome hubcaps with a huge crown logo, and a badly-placed gas tank access door (in the front passenger fender). Lampooning American cars of the 1970s, the engine knocked and rattled (in a supposedly brand-new car), and the car also had an airbag made out of a household trash bag.”

(Text courtesy of wikipedia.com)

The trend may have more to do with government incentives lowering interest rates and providing tax credits and not a lack of "want" of the good life. Besides, what is the difference between a McMansion and the million dollar plus luxury condos selling in Boston other than location? People seek success and want to have a high standard of living. If you can afford it, so what? The real shame is that if you look at the real foreclosure areas in Boston the problems don't stem as much from the McMansion buyers as much as it was with lower income and unqualified buyers duped into thinking they could afford buying any type of property.

Mish - Agree, except that when I say McMansion, what I really mean is a new house that is too big for the land it is on. McMansions are boxy and rarely match the existing architecture of a street. A 4000 sq foot house on 2 acres of land _could_ be great. The same house on 5000 sq feet is monstrous, especially when the other houses are all 1500 sq feet. That said, I am somewhat biased because I think most new construction, be it large or small, is ugly.

If you want the "good life", by all means. But the good life doesn't have to be ugly.

"If you can afford it so what." - - Huh? Have you not heard of our dwindling natural resources? Heard anything about pollution, or global warming? The flaws of those homes aren't just they're crappily constructed and ugly to look at. Think of the energy sucked up to heat/cool/illuminate them.

another aspect that makes a house qualify as a McMansion is how poorly tailored it is to how we actually live. Grand front center entrances (that are rarely used because everyone comes in through the garage or side entrance) with 2-story foyers, and dramatic "bride's" staircases, flanked by large formal living rooms and dining rooms that for most families are seldom used. Fully 25% of the square footage and cost of some homes is committed to underutilized space.

As bv said (or implied) the problem with McMansions is that they are NOT the good life. I've no problem with mansions - look at the beautiful ones on Cape Ann. But McMansions are just one dimensional cardboard stage sets. Ugly overpriced slum housing with brick facades and Norman roofs. Blech.

@bv - I think your point on how the house is built and situated is a good one. Although, I have to say that when you get out past 128 the too big for the lot and boxy is really not the case. I've seen the issues in Newton, Needham, and Wellesley, etc. and agree with you on that. But, there are some nice neighborhoods where larger homes sit on larger lots and it feels park like and abut conservation land.
@AnneM - there are some great efficiencies in larger homes that you don't get in a smaller house. Higher efficiency gas furnaces. Higher efficiency windows. Digital climate control. Multiple zones. Low gallon toilets. Efficiency shower heads. It has more to do with how the house was built and how it is used. These houses can be more efficient and lower monthly cost than many of the houses and apartments in Boston. In addition, lowering your carbon footprint is as much about your consumption style than the house. Turn off lights. Use air conditioning as needed (about a week per year) rather than the whole season. Keep your heat to 62-65 and restrict resources in rooms that get less use. Shut off vampire electronics. Open shades to let sun light heat in and close them at night to keep that heat in and cold out. I could go on. My large house is more efficient than my last house at 2000 sqr feet and the same age, and my monthly use and cost is minimally higher.

I find that newer (built in the last 10 years) houses in general are garbage. Paper thin walls, lack of woodwork and quality craftsmanship (what ever happened to solid wood doors?), flimsy construction materials..flush the toilet at 2am and you wake up the entire house. I'll take a house built in the 1960's over one built yesterday any day of the week..

I agree with comment 12; it's not just McMansions that are tacky. Most low-end houses built in the last 15 years are, if anything, even uglier than McMansions. I think the main culprit is the array of vinyl exterior pieces that have come into use in recent years. Not just siding: trim boards, nearly frameless stick-on windows with only caulking to keep the rain out, gutters that are nailed on with no attempt to integrate them with the rest of the trim, even the chimneys are framed and covered with cheap crap. And, what's with those hideous horizontally sliding basement windows that seem to show up on so many new and newly vinyl sided houses? The tilt-in basement windows, even the metal ones, which were once ubiquitous are a study in good taste compared to them. It I were a masonry contractor, I'd be targeting owners of these houses, hoping to shame them into covering up that cheap box with brick veneer, which, if done right, can at least make a house look almost real, rather than like an enormous trailer.