ooh, I like the idea of black, but probably not on a house as large as this.

I think your landscaping is going to matter quite a lot. Modern seems to mean lots of ornamental grasses and similar very clean shapes. It also tends to mean gravel and paving rather than grass, but likely you'll want to be cautious about too much stone, given that the house already provides a large expanse of stucco (I presume).

If it's feasible, I would highly recommend finding a good landscaping company, and stressing that your tastes are not traditional, and that you want to play down that aspect of the house.

Good landscaping can last as long as good architecture, if it's maintained properly. (Also, they'll know enough not to plant the trees right next to the house, as people naturally tend to do when they're softening a brand-new construction.

For this size house, I'm thinking a gray about two shades lighter than the roof (which looks gray to me). Keep the crisp white trim or go white and black on the trim.

Where's Andree with her Paintshop program when we need her?

I'd be tempted to have the door- and window-frames go black, but they're probably the kind that is very high-end and painted in the factory, so you could just take the whole house to a light grey, I suppose, and then do SOME black accents here and there, like if there is some wood around the window frames.

Instead of a drum thing -- you're talking about on the porch, right? -- is there an outdoor grade of a pendant lamp that has a spherical globe? That's generically modern, and yet might work with that arch. I've gotta say it's kind of hard to modernize this, with all those arches.

And I'm not a landscaper, but I think you might have to embrace the past that this place invokes to some degree and get those tall skinny cedar things, maybe even an allee' of them running up to the door, but at least flanking the doors, or possibly the windows.

That's the best I can do for now.

I think you should "go" with the style of the exterior as it is. Nothing will really make it contemporary. Your idea of a pendant is good. And if you'll recall London's Georgian houses, a warm white w/black trim is classic and clean. OB is correct that the landscaping is key, and a modern landscape would give hints of what's inside. A formal European-type garden would go with the exterior; such a landscape, with gravelled areas and controlled shrubbery would certainly go well with the contemporary styling you will have inside your home. Think Phillippe Stark.

wowwy. now that's a house!

what is the finished exterior material? cement? like a stucco look? are there going to be shutters? or any kind of porch?

my initial instinct is to say light gray/white (google Martha Stewart Bedford House), but I'd need to know more.

invest in a few full-size trees.

What a nice big house (slowly turning green with envy here at my desk). I agree the landscaping will make a tremendous difference. My mom painted her split-level ranch house a putty color and then used a blackish hunter green and a paint about two shades darker than the putty on the trim. It really looks nice. Also, get some large house numbers!

Contemporary landscaping, yes. Something along the lines of Martha Schwartz's work. I'm envisioning her iconic grid of ceramic frogs....

www.marthschwartz.com

I hope this works

That is a classic McMansion--and that is not a compliment. I don't mean to offend, I just find those sort of bland houses that proliferate everywhere a symptom of a culture of followers and status obsessed show-offs.
That said, I applaud you if you are willing to go out on a limb and make the house a little more unique with some paint.
I had a bland little 1940s cape code that I painted black with white trim. It transformed the house into a classic little black dress sort of affair and made it pop. I agree with others that it is too big to paint black or slate.
The house is clearly defined by different sections; you could break up the massing by painting the main body of the house one color and the wings a different color. I would unify the look with matching trim color on around all of the windows.
Landscaping always helps. Save yourself and the environment some hassle by avoiding a huge expanse of mowed lawn and try different native grasses, flowers and plants. Although, such houses generally come with a lot of neighborhood association rules that not only dictate landscaping, but may dictate how you paint your house.

Depending on the development, you may not be able to too-drastically alter the house color or details.

Other than that, I think your non-permanent additions will give vistors the contemporary impression (but they may not be that obvious from drive-bys...)
A stainless steel mailbox
Matte black door
Modern house numbers
Large architectural planters
Brushed aluminum door hardware

I also think stone can be both traditional and contemporary.

But, my eternal question... if you are more contemporary, why did you decide on this style house, in a "traditional" development?

It may be a McMansion but so what. It is her house and she wants to make it look nice. Michelle must have good taste if she comes to AT!

Do you live in Louisville Kentucky - 'cause it looks exactly like all the other houses in one of the developments out there. Can't be helpful here - these kinds of cookie-cutter homes make me shudder.

Warning: Rant to Follow

I am crabby today and I don’t have any suggestion on what color to paint this house. In fact, I wonder what this house is doing on this site at all since I think nearly everything about it is antithetical to AT:NY. The part of AT’s mission that I most admire is about “reducing [people’s] reliance on stuff” and the commitment to living well in small spaces. I think about how much stuff will be required to fill a place like this and the excess offends me. (I know that AT doesn’t explicitly state that environmental responsibility is part of their mission but that vast expanse in front of the house that has a 90% chance of becoming lawn also offends me.)

I know, I know, who cares about offending me…

Turning the oversized, mind-numbing, (frankly) ugly boxes that now proliferate the American landscape into spaces that reflect “good home design” is an important and worthy task but one to be covered by McMansion Therapy.

A little editorial focus, please…

I agree with slash. Why is this here?

hear, hear slash! i was confused by the post as well and was quite surprised there were 14 comments? AT is uniquely urban not banally suburban.

p2--you ask the exact same question I had, but deleted two times instead of posting. didn't want to start a flame war. But now that it's out there, why buy brand new construction if it's not your taste? clearly, there's some money to be thrown around if that's the house Michele and her husband ended up with. If so, why not spend it on something older, more in line with their tastes?

I have to confess, I am of the mind that this is a set-up; the house is not Michelle's, and she's just trying to see how riled up this group can get when presented with a plea to help make something clean and contemporary out of a 3500 sq ft monstrosity perched atop a clear-cut mound of red clay. but then again, I'm the queen of conspiracy theories.

I'm with you John. We can jam a lot style into our little places. It would be difficult to know where to begin with that monstrosity. I just cannot understand why anybody would want to live in a place that big. It's not energy efficient. It looks far away from everything. I guess I feel like most of us, or rather I, can't relate.

I think it slightly unfair, without knowing anything about the construction, systems or developer, to say this place is automatically "not energy efficient."

Sorry folks, but this place is horrible. This has got to be a joke.

Weeeeeelllll... there's always my theory that when the economy of California collapses in a heap, all them thar suburban McMansions will be divided up as apartments. Master suites will make fabulous studio apartments. Lunch in the vast stretches of housing will be provided by roving taco trucks.

Or Michelle could be planning to move her entire extended family into it, as many families in the far 'burbs here have done. The space looks a tad less over-generous when Grandma & Grandpa plus three sets of married adult children are paying for it and living in it.

I refuse to be riled today. I am a Californian raised in the 1970s. Things are, and it's beautiful that things are.

You urban snobs are ridiculous (and I live in New York City)! God forbid people chose to live in HOUSES, not apartments. Get over yourselves.

I had always thought that with these delvopments that it is required to match the others houses with a choice of beige, tan or taupe. I have a fantasy of one night going in the middle of a large devopment and painting one house bright orange and then watch the ensuing riot of neighbors.

I have to say I agree with the dissenting posts above. I, too, was wondering what this huge monstrosity was doing on this site, as it does seem antithetical to everything AT is about. And all I can think about is how much fuel will be needed to keep this place warm in the winter, and how much more dependent it makes us (collectively) on terrorist states and places like Iraq.

MissPinkKate--

I just think people are reacting to this being a bit out of character for the normal "Apartment Therapy" fodder. I mean, it's not just "a house"...

It's sort of like a Hummer ad in Mother Jones.

I'm also truly, earnestly, and genuinely interested in hearing what compels a modernist to buy into a development with this aesthetic. That's curiosity, not criticism.

MissPinkKate--I don't begrudge people who choose to live in houses. I grew up in a house and aspire to own one someday. A HOUSE, that is. Not a monument to excess, consumerism, and environmental irresponsibility.

And Patrick, while it may be unfair to assume that this place is not energy efficient, it is not unfair to assert that hundreds of these homes go up every day that are not. I guess it's also unfair to assume that an immense lawn of water-guzzling fescue is going to some day adorn that clay. Maybe Michelle is going install a windmill with which to power her new home (wonder what the develepment's covenenants have anything to say about that?).

Michelle, I think that you might get more help from an architect or designers that work with your type of house. This seems like the wrong crowd to ask for advice on your new home.

ocgrl wrote:
> If so, why not spend it on something older,
> more in line with their tastes?

If they want contemporary, why are you assuming their tast is for something older. I at first questioned why, if they had this kind of money, they didn't hire an architect for a custom contemporary home. Then, I presumed the answer- that, more than for style, they purchased for location (ie. good school district, near office or more likely good commute near expressway, etc.). When you buy into these developments, you generally have little control over the architectural style of the home. Even if you buy pre-construction, at best you get to pick from a few standard floorplans, a couple of window treatment, a few colors, pool or no pool, 2 or 3 car garage if your lot will fit it, carpet or hardwood, and sign right here please.

It would be great if we could make all our life's choices based entirely on our ideal, but most of us have to work within what is available... even those who have a lot of money to spend.

That said, if the neighborhood rules will allow it, put this house in a tuxedo. Paint it black. And if you've really got some money to spend, put on grey slate roof tile.

Add color with a large wild flower garden across you lawn (less to mow).

Once again the AT crow jumps to conclusions and incriminations without knowing anything about someone. P2 at least asks the question in a nice way, but what is with the need to an additional 25 people to jump on board saying basically "me too" to thoughts about why owning this house is a sin against humanity.

Move along people, the question didn't ask if this house was a good idea or not, it asked about what color to paint it.

anyone want to wager on how long it will take for this thread to melt down before comments are closed? This would make three in a week...an AT record?

"Hummer ad in Mother Jones"....exaaaactly!

Which brings my imagination to this (albeit off-topic) truly cretive web site that a friend of a friend runs and is worth about 2 minutes of work-time web browsing:

http://www.fuh2.com

Now back to the discussion on the big house...

misspinkkate,
get over your self-righteousness and look at the title of this blog. i agree that folks don't have to lambast the tastes of the owners of this house but you display an utter misunderstanding of this forum if you think it's ok to start putting upp any old residence for comment. why not a lean-to shack in, say, british columbia - wouldn't that inspire even a little confusion? if not then your at the wrong place.

BTW, people, this place is more in line with 7,500 - 8,000 square feet, not 3,500.

sammie, you're right. I misunderestimated.

The meltdown is usually unmistakeable by post 68, and the shutdown occurs around post 130, that being when the blood is starting to soak the flotaki, and it's time to get out the enzyme cleaner before the stains set.

On that McMansion topic...a good article by June Fletcher in the June 16, 2006, Wall Street Journal, page W1:

"The golden age of McMansions may be coming to an end. These oversized homes -- characterized by sprawling layouts on small lots, and built in cookie-cutter style by big developers -- fueled much of the housing boom. But thanks to rising energy and mortgage costs, shrinking families and a growing number of retirement-age baby boomers set on downsizing, there are signs of an emerging glut..."

And

"For anti-McMansion activists, who hate to see big homes supplant smaller "teardowns" in established neighborhoods, a decline in demand may be good news. Homeowners in some areas have successfully lobbied for laws designed to rein in the light-and-view-blocking monsters: Last year, Arlington County, Va., limited home footprints to no more than 30% of a lot, while Wood-Ridge, N.J., recently said homes could take up no more than 55% of a lot..."

Arielle we import and almost the same amount of crude oil and petroleum products from Canada as all the persian gulf combined. I always thought those canadians were shady, now I know why. They must be terrorists! :)

It isn't safe to allow political rhetoric to be the basis for view on realities of the world.

I still think you're all a little nutso. Yes, this is "apartment therapy", but the owner of the blog posted this question hoping we could provide a little help. Not judgments. Plus, if some of you got out of your little urban bubbles, you'd know that this is what new houses look like nowadays- there are only so many small houses left. You're all crabs.

I'm not slamming this house or its owner, I did my best to give an honest answer (and even defended them), but I do get the sense that the board is being baited with some of this stuff.

When the premise of the site is for living in the constraints of small urban apartments, I must ask:
A.) Why someone would submit such a question
B.) Why the powers that be would choose to acknowledge it by posting the house

If just seems like a setup for potential ugliness.

Or maybe this site has begun to become popular out in the burbs of God's country, and Maxwell is getting deluged with these type of submissions.

Anyway, I gave my input- Maxwell gave good advice on going black. I think it would be crowned well will a gray slate stone roof, if that can fit in their budget. Then to bring color in, go crazy with a front lawn of wild-flowers will a long single gray slate walkway up to the front door.

Ooo yea, black with some dramatic lighting on the walkways/driveway, perhaps? That'd be sleek.

i'm with most of the posters wondering why of all places the owner of this McMonstrosity came to a site called Apartment Therapy to ask for advice about turning her newly purchased traditional tuscan villa style home into a modernist paradise.

that said, there are a lot of reasons that compel people to move into this type of development. i know that, in my home town (which used to be small and rural and is now sprawly and wannabe suburban), there are now a lot more tract-style homes available than anything older. while i wouldn't say that someone with the resources to buy this big had no choice, i've seen many people move into these sorts of places because, well, that's what's available where they live.

and i've often wondered myself how i would customize a place like this. if i had this home and was trying to make it 'mine', i'd probably go classic Edwardian as someone else said, a nice creamy white with black accents and maybe some reds or greens thrown into the mix somehow, even through choice of flowers in the landscaping, mailbox, interior window treatments visible to the outside, etc.

i don't know contemporary landscaping from a hole in the ground, so i can't advise on that, but i think if i somehow ended up with this gigantic of a lawn and money to burn i would probably put some playground equipment on it and let the neighborhood kids come play. or lay concrete and start a skate park for the local teenagers who have nowhere to hang out and nothing to do.

Chris I agree with a lot of your post. I think the reason we are seeing people submit things like this is because AT used to be a great community and resource where people would really help contribute some great ideas in a friendly manner. But why has AT become so exclusive lately? Yeah this stretches the boundaries of the core mission of this blog, but so what? Regardless, I don't think the people who disagree with this posting have much to worry about. If people have been reading the blog lately I imagine they have all been scared off and AT can soon become the clubhouse for the haters of all things non-urban, non-original, non-DIY, and non-expensive.

That should have been expensive sans the non. I got carried away with the nons!

In answer to whoever asked, why buy a traditional house when it's contemporary that you're after? There aren't too many areas in this country where new construction contemporary housing is available of similar size and comparable prices to traditional McMansions. I dislike McMansions immensely. I live just outside Philadelphia and here in the 'burbs (good school district etc) the only contemporary housing that exists is custom. Custom aint cheap. FYI I live in a '50's cape cod. Can't stand the outside but the house was cheap.

I don't think I'll comment on color until I know where the house is as I feel that colors do better in some climates than others. Example: I JUST bought my first house and the previous owner painted it this peach sherbert color that's pretty out of place in Seattle, but would look GREAT in Italy! :)

(and note, my house is 710 sq feet so I figure I'm still allowed to hang out here)

If the question was: How do you like my house? Then you've done a great job answering her. But it wasn't and it IS someone's house so why not just skip it?

I can think of a couple reasons you might build a house like that without even giving this too much together. One: Maybe she's married. When you're married you make a lot of big decisions together: what city? how many kids? public school for our kids and put your mom in the nice nursing home or private school and not so nice nursing home, what kind of house? These all may not go your way or you may choose not to fight one battle in exchange for winning another. Or, I guess they do go all your way and you have a pretty miserable spouse.

Two, you get transferred a lot. I know a lot of people who do this. These houses, whether you like them or not, are often the safest move financially. You may not have time to buy and fix up that cute colonial and wait for that part of town to revive. Maybe after the 4 years each in Nashville, Geneva, Atlanta, and Phoenix, you'll get to settle down in style in the city and home of your choice

Maybe this isn't your life or your style -- and it's not mine -- but this wasn't the question anyone asked.

I'm just getting tired of "I don't agree so YOU must be an idiot" around here of late.

That reasoning didn't win any high school debate club debates. Still doesn't.

(Juliannna: That wasn't directed at you, btw!)

This is the intarweb, not the NYC apartment club, right? Not everyone shoehorns themselves into small apartments in the city..... It does seem like an odd post though. Seems to counter everything the site is about. BUT Maxwell created the site and he posted the question, so he must feel it has some merit, right????

Loved the fuh2 site!

I think the color choice will depend of the material chosen for exterior cladding.

One of the reasons I dislike McMansions is the way they usually get the half fake fieldstone, half fake stucco (is it called Driv-it?). I would recommend keeping it simple one material. And if you can scout some traditional buildings from about 80 to 90 years old take notes on the scale of trim around windows and doors, also trying to keep it simple. It is not so much a killer bay-window, or a flashy color that can make a house stand out, it is a combination of simple subtle elements that make a house outstanding...

"If the question was: How do you like my house? Then you've done a great job answering her. But it wasn't and it IS someone's house so why not just skip it?"

But we have a responsibility to maintain the integrity of this blog. This is a community in itself, we don't just answer post mindlessly, we try to help each other out, but sometimes there's more important things to discuss...like the integrity of this blog. If the post in question isn't fitting with the ideas and ideals set for the community/blog, then we have the right to comment on it.

Posts are more like conversations, they meander, and it’s not a school meeting where everyone must raise their hand and answer questions directly.

As for this:
"Plus, if some of you got out of your little urban bubbles, you'd know that this is what new houses look like nowadays- there are only so many small houses left. You're all crabs."

It's unfortunate that housing is like this nowadays. And as architect and design related professionals (as I'm sure many of us are) it is our responsibility to promote change and do our best to move housing in a new direction. I think that AT in part is helping this cause by creating a place for people who are interested in living more efficiently and leaving a smaller footprint to congregate and discuss both things they like in the design world as well as issues that need to be discussed. And I don't think we need for someone to ask the question "What’s wrong with huge houses” for us to discuss it. Posts are conversations.

Go with Baby Blue, it's my fav

Its nice of you to post your house to remind us apartment dwellers that we live in limited space. I am a hater and can fully admit to it, so while you were innocently posing (yeah right) a question, we all know you just wanted to brag a little.

Answering the question: I'd go for several tones of Martha Stewart chicken egg greens going from dark to light and keeping the trim classic white or high gloss black.

Not answering the question:
1. Perhaps her modern sensibilities will be demonstrated on the interior free from exterior constraints?

2. Does this mean that I can't post about my Mc-Brownstone in Brooklyn?

why is the McMANSION here on an APARTMENT website? you can fit 5 apartments in that thing!

well neal you can post about whatever you want. doesn't mean we have to like it or think you're doing right by your space. the brownstone issue is an even touchier one, i think, because in my opinion a poorly renovated brownstone can be worse in a lot of ways than a McMansion. not least of which is the fact that one has almost complete control in gutting a brownstone, whereas one may not have as many options (due to availability issues, development agreements, local ordinances, etc.) when moving into a McMansion. if that makes any sense at all.

i think a baby blue or pale green exterior would make the house look like a birthday cake. which actually might be pretty cool, but probably isn't 'contemporary' in the way Michelle is going for.

and i think 'save it for the interior' is probably the best advice of all. you bought a traditional home, not a contemporary one. just as we have to work with the bones of our interiors, we also have to do right by our exteriors. though the black with dramatic lighting is sounding more and more attractive...

Without making any judgement whatsoever, I too wondered why this was posted here - at first I thought it was making a statement against this type of housing, then I read the text. (Realize that my sentence above could be construed as making a judgement.)

Just seems out of place.

It's probably going to come painted and trimmed and all that. Leave it as it is, and instead focus on tasty modern design landscaping and lawn furnishings.

I think it looks quite lovely framed by the trees behind it, in the clay color. I would not paint any portion of the home black, simply because of the additional heat the black will generate. You don't need to pay extra to cool your home because of an exterior color choice. You'll have enough of a battle with the dark roof.

Nelson platform bench outside. Is that whole dirt area pictured outside your yard or is there a road going eventually? Hah! And I'm guessing the right side is the garage?

(working left to right) Kitchen on left, then dining, then hall, then living??? Or is kitchen in the back, dining on left, then living, then family?

Anyway, that doesn't really matter, other than I'm a house-plan-fiend.

Modern landscaping ideas. Using the square larger concrete pieces, you create a grid, with low ground cover growing between them. This is used as a basic pathway, rather than a continual paving. Or used to extend the area of a paved area, if the paved area is required (and so you don't trip over the ground cover).

You can use metal spheres in the landscaping, like these:
http://www.wagnercompanies.com/spheres_and_hemispheres.aspx

They're something streamlined, and yet won't make your neighbors moan or shriek in horror when you've erected some monstrosity...when you're calling it "modern sculpture". They're similar enough to traditional Victorian gazing balls, but aren't glass and won't break.

They'd take on an interesting patina over time, depending on what kind you choose.

They can be made into fountains too, as seen here:
http://www.waterfountains.com/fountain.html

You may wish to use something like that seasonally. Or instead of having a vast amount of water, just a small amount, and surround it with a planter.

Use top-down/bottom-up Hunter Douglas window treatments throughout the home, for a consistant look outside and inside, and they will complement both.

Check into your local Agricultural Extension for their Master Gardeners for advice. You may find that there are many species native to your region that would be fine and outstanding plants for your yard that will require little care and maintenance. Plants that will reseed themselves. Plants that are fine with the soil.

Let the region dictate your plantings. Let the house style help with the exterior color. And go nuts inside. Do whatever you want with furnishings, lighting, textiles. That is where you can let your modern senses and tastes express themselves.

You get to decide, do you want to live IN your home, or live FOR your home? The first is to make it "user-friendly" and "region-friendly"...the second is to make it so high-maintenance that you end up spending all your spare time on the riding mower and using pruning shears to keep things in check.

Interior, that means having endless things to vacuum or dust, or having it be fast to clean (and that's a big house, so you definitely want it to be as fast to clean as possible, whether it's you cleaning or you hire someone).

If it's a NEW group of homes, and nobody has a yard yet, then definitely try getting ahold of the local Master Gardeners. See if you can work out some kind of reduced fee for native/low-maintenance yard area and have them post a sign on your yard as to who did it. Something like that can be beneficial not just to keeping your costs and maintenance low, but can also help local native birds and other species.

Because your home DID displace some kind of plants. Something that was eaten by birds, rodents (that includes squirrels), or bees/butterflies, etc.

well, at least no one has to worry about the open threads deteriorating what with the good questions and the house tours getting everybody riled up.

meanwhile, my question on the open thread languishes unanswered and ignored.

speaking of which, I've got an essay on my website that is relevant to this topic, and I'd be glad to host a debate on the topic over thataway (link in my name).

(giving up my anonymity - a freaky feeling...please be kind - or at least civil...)

How about this? Someone was talking about woodland murals on another thread. I think it would be awesome to just wrap this baby up in a tyvek tree mural to get it to blend in with the background. Then install an immense reflecting pool in the front yard (no need for a nasty lawn), and you'll get double the effect. totally postmodern--it'd be like a Christo installation.

HAH! I'd love to see the HOA respond to that one!

hey original blues, I didn't see your question. Is there an open thread, or was it posted on the one that got shut down? (I didn't have the pleasure of reading that thread...)

Oh stop whining. I live in a large home and I come to this site all the time to get design ideas from apartments that I can incorporate into mine. I think the community should take it as a compliment that the poster has requested their design advice. Granted, if you live in an apartment then how much exterior design experience are you going to have, but you can post something constructive or not post at all. It would be nice to see a "HomeTherapy" or "FreeStandingStructureTherapy" sister site.

Anyway, you can only make this home so contemporary because the architecture has already established lines that are more traditional. And there are probably some rules as to what you can/cannot do in your development if it is a closed community.

That being said; paint, shutters, and landscaping can all bring this home forward in time. You definitely want to focus on adding contrast. I would lighten up the color of the house and go with dark shutters. Then I would put in some stepped landscape features with small modern straight and curved walls. I would also build a courtyard area around the front door. Additionally you could add some ledgestone to the extended surface around the entry. I would use a combination of light and dark crushed granite and non-traditional grasses or even that new astroturf landscaping product. Stick with simple plants with clean lines. Maybe a modern water feature or two.

Good Luck!

"Luxury is often a little clownish when it is taken up by the masses, from the automotive fins of the 1950s to today’s SUV."

Original Blues, that's a gorgeous sentence.

Painting the whole shebang black isn't going to help its energy efficiency... air conditioning a giant black box with a dark roof? Egads. Maybe throw some solar panels or photovoltaic tiles on the roof.

Um, sometimes energy efficiency is about keeping warm in the winter, which a dark roof *will* help do...

i feel like adding shutters at all would lend itself to a more traditional feel rather than bringing it up to date. when i see shutters i think 'cottage' or 'farmhouse', not 'van der rohe'.

and while i'm no huge fan of how catty the site has gotten lately, i don't think this thread has gotten particularly out of hand. i don't think any of the haters' comments have been inappropriate, just, well, critical. which is to be expected when post photos of your 8000 sf home on a site that is supposed to be about small footprints and efficient, sustainable land use. does everybody have to live in an apartment? no. but there's a difference between a 'free standing structure' or 'house' and a HUGE and presumably wasteful mansion.

to wax political here for a moment, this is what really gets me about the current trends toward this sort of thing. people now don't even get the difference between 5000+ square foot monstrosity of a home and a 'free standing structure'. the issue is not that you don't share walls with your neighbor. it's that structures like this which are inhabited by, say, less than 5 people, are pretty antithetical to what this site is supposed to be about. or what i thought it was supposed to be about, anyway.

Hmmm, once again I'm not sure what to think. The people who are questioning why people are questioning why this was posted are probably people not really familiar with the mission of this site. It is about paring down as much as possible--and while this may be pared down, it seems unlikely. But God knows we've been wrong before!

That said, I think P2 asked the questions nicely. There's no need for "This is a hideous house!" etc.

But Misspinkkate, I disagree with you. Certainly these houses have been springing up everywhere, but there has been a reaction to them because IN GENERAL, they make a huge impact on the environment. I mean, heating, cooling, etc. for this house will use a lot of resources--and that's not even mentioning the trees that have been felled. I don't think people have to just say "This is the way things are now" and sit back passively, but just my opinion.

this is APARTMENT therapy not color my mcmansion
hunh ? jes maybe?

yeah patrick, but that only gets you through 1/2 the year. what about the other 1/2? You'd have to really work the landscaping to gain any passive-solar benefits, although i can't tell which direction the house faces. i wonder if you could make this a giant experiment in sustainability to see if you could get a house this big off the grid, get it to use less water than its neighbors, and get the inside all environmentally friendly-like. If you could pull that off, it could be amazing.

Didn't Jimmy Carter try something like that, until Ronald Reagan pulled the solar panels off?

This house turns me off so much because of what it stands for, that I don't care what color it is painted. And for those of you who say a house doesn't "stand for " anything, I say yes, it does.

This house turns me off so much because of what it stands for, that I don't care what color it is painted. And for those of you who say a house doesn't "stand for" anything, I say yes, it does.

If people want to participate in activisim against McMansions, Fiona, that's fine. This perfectly innocent blog question that someone asked about what color to paint their house is not the place to do it. It's not like bitching in this thread will do any good to the greater scheme of home architecture. Here, it's just rude.

Now I'm going to have nightmares about this monstrosity. Nicely done, just before the weekend!

What about you paint it in a zebra pattern? Surely won't hurt the lack of esthetic and it would at least bring some humor to this mundane suburban godzilla.

MissPinkKate,

have you read any of our other threads recently? honestly, those make this one look like an episode of Mr. Rogers. While I don't condone personal attacks and blatantly rude behavior, I see no problem with giving their opinions of the spaces posted here. We don't really go by the 'if you can't say something nice...' philosophy here (for better or worse), and our threads tend to be wide ranging discussions rather than simple "yes." "no." "taupe." "ceiling fan." responses to the questions. Many if not most posters to this thread offered up advice on color and landscaping choices. If Michelle doesn't want to deal with criticism of her choice of architectural styles, she'll skim that and take the color suggestions if they interest her. If she wants to debate the merits of large scale new construction or justify her choices, she can do that. Nothing said here so far is of the 'make the baby jesus cry' variety.

Sometimes i detect a bit of personal offense in these 'play nice' comments. To the point that it bugs me. People have different opinions about space, design, architecture, appropriate land use, etc. Rather than try to censor those you don't like or that give you second thoughts about your own choices, just deal, ok?

I love Maxwell's idea of black surrounded by green plantings! My intial thougth was that sounds beautiful, but expensive to cool in the summer, but with a house that huge it's going to be expensive anyway. As Wesley Snipes said in some otherwise forgetable movie - always bet on black. Whatever color you chose, I do hope you'll give it some fabulous landscaping. What a privilege to have so much planting space. Good luck!

Maybe Michelle should have asked the "devlopment" what color is acceptable on her house, they probbaly have the color scheme planned out for the neighborhood,instead of asking "What color should I paint my enormous suburban home?" to a site called APARTMENT therapy.
It really doesn't seem rude to comment on that fact.
There are better resources for house and landscaping designs than here.
If she frequents here she would know what would be said when aking her innocent blog question.

why, thankee, lj. much obliged.

and ocgrl, the current open thread is in an inconspicuous position down past "hot posts."

Opoponax just because you don't go by the "if you can't say something nice" philosophy why do you automatically paint the whole community that way? I don't seem to remember the negative vibe until the last couple months. Yes people have always been active commenters, adding more than one word responses, but it has never been so negative. The problem is so many people have seemed to come to the conclusion that to have a so called intellectual debate about issues you have to trash somebody else. Comments like "banally urban" and "this place is horrible" are far from a considerate discussion and meant to disparage someones home and lifestyle.

I don't feel like I have a "a responsibility to maintain the integrity of this blog", certainly not if it means being mean to people.

All this does is make it the hot thread of the day. Is that what you wanted?

And since when is this site about "sustainable land use"?! I come here for good ideas on how to paint my dining room or where to buy a cool coffee table. There are homes, not just apts, all over this and the other AT sites.

I'm all for being catty if we're talking about the new issue of Domino or whatever, but I just don't how getting on Michelle is helpful.

(Never have a problem with you P2.)

first post on AT. If this site had only houses like this one, I'd never come back here again.

Actually, Julianna, this site is about small, urban, and thus, sustainable living. If you've read Maxwell's book, it's about using only what you need.

But that said, I think anyone should be able to post any question, but this is sort of an odd fit for the site.

i agree with you. i just don't think most of the discussion here has been "getting on Michelle".

Yeah, there've been a couple of sorta nasty things said. I cringed at "Banally Suburban" as well. But there's always one or two people in a thread who do that, no matter what the question. Most of the discussion in this thread right now is of the civil variety. Most of it is relevant and not of a personally disparaging nature. A lot of it is not particularly about Michelle or her specific choices (other than those questioning why someone going to a contemporary exterior chose such a traditional architectural style) but of a development trend in the abstract.

So some people don't like McMansions. Get over it.

Hmmm I knew the minute I saw the picture that the thread would be a flame war.

However I too love the idea of painting this black, surrounded by Edward Scissorhands type shrub-sculptures.

One of my brothers lives in this sort of house and frankly I hate everything about it... you have very little control over what color to paint your exterior. Black would never be allowed.

No problem with people not liking McMansions. That is their choice. I don't want to live in one either. When somebody puts their home on this blog with a question about something specific, usually design related, why does everyone assume that means every thing is fair game? If you want people to continue to submit pictures and questions you should think about that. Maybe if you can't understand being nice for the sake of niceness you can see the selfish reason of continuing to get submissions to the blog as a reason for people to behave. Yes this thread has been not too bad and there are definitely some interesting discussions that could be had about sustainability and appropriateness of current housing trends, but I think some of us are just trying to say that we should think about whether this is the right place for that. I think the selfishness exhibited by people that think just because they can post something negative means they should go ahead and do it says a lot more about society than this McMansion.

maybe this Good Question should have been posted to the L.A. Apartment Therapy. it goes more with their aesthetic, and people over there tend to keep the gloves on.

i just reread the entire thread. most comments have not been negative, per se, they have just not been supportive. we don't HAVE to be supportive of every home we see posted here. i counted 3 posters who made rude, cutting remarks. three out of 80-something is pretty good for AT these days.

i guess there is the notion that those of us who don't have constructive advice shouldn't post anything at all, but that isn't the general rule here (even in threads that stay polite).

This is getting silly...Must be strange though for Mcmansion owners to stop and wonder about the people that hold their abodes in contempt? Maybe its time for.... a new addition and
metal clad PANIC ROOM. Bah

Why paint? Leave it the color it is now. Alternatively, stucco the darn thing the grey concrete color and have it whole shebang polished. Or, cover it up with matte metallic shingles (like cape-cod gone gehry?).

My day will be complete when the original poster returns to explain that:

--She and her partner have 19 foster children and three aged parents at home
--She and her partner run a major charitable foundation out of their home and give fundraising parties there
--They also raise and train guide dogs, thus requiring a large yard
--One of them is an expert on native landscaping
--The house is wind- and solar-powered

Yes, it's an extreme scenario -- but people are attacking Michelle's housing choice based on no knowledge about her beyond one photo of the house.

Like p(too), I'm *curious* why she chose this house, given her preference for a more contemporary look, and I'm *curious* why she's posting a McMansion question on a site devoted to small-space living. But I'll hold off on passing judgment until I know more about the situation.

What happened to the Open Thread? The last time I checked, it had 3 nice posts on it.

I think people who work hard deserve to live in as big-ass a house as they want and can afford. No apologies or explanations necessary.

Now is THIS the forum to showcase it? Not so sure.

But people have a right to live wherever, IN whatever they want.

Some people in the rest of the country would think the rents we pay in NYC to be obscene and wasteful... "when all that money could go to charity."

I'm just sayin.'

I just pray that your house isn't coated with that fake stucco stuff, (EIFS-Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems). I just sat in a trial last week where folks are suing because the exteriors of 800K-plus houses in tony DC suburbs are falling apart with mold and rot after just 2,3,4 years.

the opoponax,

please explain this comment: "it goes more with their aesthetic, and people over there tend to keep the gloves on."

The minute I saw the photo of your house I knew the posts would get nasty soon enough (re: the McMansion post...which is where I stopped reading). How tiresome. But there is something about your question and Maxwell's response that makes me grumpy, too.

It looks like your home is out in what was once open country. That means that the idea of the development is to "use" the natural landscape. Which means that the houses should -- optimally -- sit down quietly and not compete for attention (black, Maxwel????). I think that the existing wall color is absolutley fine for either a modern or traditional feel. But I would change the white trim to a dark color -- probably in the cool, mossy greens -- and bring in a third color for the door. Look at Benjamin Moore's brochure for their exterior Historical colors. They are featured in coordinated groups of four (I'd stick with three), and they are foolproof. Your home is traditional, not modern, so I wouldn't fight it. But if you want to make it feel more modern, just hold back on the details and -- as someone said -- get stainless steel door handles, numbers, maybe a mailbox (I expect you have a rural mailbox at the road), and lights. The tv show Curb Appeal has done modern takes on many older San Francisco-area homes. You might watch it to see if you can catch one.

As someone said earlier, your landscape choices will give as much of a style message as your house. Go with minimal plantings and strong shapes (and low-water, native plants, preferably), and some cool hardscape. No estate sign. No "Tuscan-feel," as the property shows say...if I hear that one more time, I'll choke.

If you want to go with a lighter color, btw, the cooler grays and greens look much more modern than anything in the yellow/ochre range. Nothing bright, in any case!

I live in a rural, mountain area that has been discovered by people who occasionally build Look-at-Me houses. One monsterous house nearby is painted bright yellow, with white trim, and has all kinds of show-off wrought iron on it and around it. Including a very aggressive-looking fence. So, that person moved up here to enjoy the natural surroundings, and then made the surroundings ugly for everyone else. I get angry every time I pass that house. My own home is painted a cool sand color, and has bluish-green trim (which is the same color as the surrounding coniferous trees). It lets the surroundings get the glory.

So please, please, please, make you house behave!

(And it looks as if you have a perfect set-up for solar panels...have you considered it?)

people on the L.A. site are more polite and supportive in general about people's own spaces that they've chosen to show, in my experience.

also, i've noticed more non-apartment, non-modern entries over there that people tend to be pretty enthusiastic about.

i meant that statement as a compliment and polite suggestion, not as some kind of snark about those rubes on the other coast and their questionable taste in architecture. and i think part of the reason we let things fly over here a bit more than on the other sites is that it's very new york centric, whereas the other sites seem to be populated by people from more polite parts of the country. Those who are looking for complete and unadulterated support would probably acheive the desired result by posting to the L.A. or Chicago site instead of the New York one.

geez.

Purple Night by Pratt and Lambert is a great choice for a brownish/purplish black house. It has a bit more dimension than flat black and may be more acceptable within your housing community.

The brownish building in the foreground of this picture is stained Purple Night :
http://www.jacksonmeadow.com/images/wellhouse_entry2.jpg

Also consider installing a silver steel or aluminum roof instead of traditional asphalt shingles. For stonework, consider a gray limestone or bluestone. Add simple metal window boxes to make the facade a bit more multidimensional.

Stay away from traditional landscaping (i.e. kidney shaped planting beds). Create simple geometric beds and paving areas by pulling straight lines out from the architecture into the landscape; this will help ground the house to the site. Massings of one or two plant species will go a long way to help your house look more contemporary.

Good luck!

Fiona wrote:
> ...this site is about small, urban, and thus, sustainable living.

Maybe, in some capacity, that is true of this site, but I think some people here are being too generous and presumptuous about urban dwellers... that "urban" is therefore by definition about sustainable living, and not only that, but the proactive political choice of the citizens... you've got to be kidding. A lot of so called conservationism in a city like New York has to do with necessity more than intent. I've never known a city dweller that didn't droll over the Penthouse, or that would turn down a 4000 sq. ft. loft on political principal. I live in the city, and my apartment would be considered medium sized, but only because that is what I can afford, not because I'd never accept more space because my politics forbid it... please. Sorry, but some of the self righteousness hypocrisy here was becoming more than I could bear.

-------------

I have a new theory- Every time Maxwell posts something provocative, it becomes the hottest thread. Everyone piles on. This invariably increases his reader supplied content, raises his site traffic, and by extension increases his advertising revenue... ok, maybe by an extra dollar or two a day, but still... I'm on to your diabolic scheme!

I take total blame for what Jill tells me is equivalent to baiting the readers. I have to admit that I was - as will most every question - genuinely interested in this somewhat odd question but only dimly realized that this was totally asking for trouble on a Friday afternoon.

I will watch my step!

My apologies to Michelle if she was in any way shocked at the lively response and we'll simply close comments now.

Have a great weekend everyone and enjoy yourselves!

There is a nice site out there that deals with pre construction property and should give you some nice ideas about color.
http://www.off-plan.com