apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

Looks like 4 stories to me...

...and how is it that many mega-houses are billed as "Green"? Houses with elevators but no solar panels don't seem very "green" to me.

One other thing I thought was telling was the cost of the Paperstone countertops - materials and installation ran over twice the cost of granite. Until the cost and materials of going green comes down significantly and is available at your local Home Depot, regular folks on a budget simply won't bother.

At $2.6M, I can imagine why it's still on the market.

All I have to say is that in that neighborhood, for that house, if I had $2.6M, I'd totally buy it. Corona Heights is one of my favorite locations in the city.

I know I'll take flak for this... but I'm only enticed by green building when it's still aesthetically pleasing. This isn't something I'd spring for- it just looks like a condo building.

Of course it's a lovely home--for that money, it ought to be.

But it's six bedrooms and four baths, for a family with two adults and two little kids. To me "green" means occupying less space per person and generally having less impact on the environment. This home has 1000 square feet for each of them. I don't care how much recycled insulation or solar you use, this place does not fit any definition of green that I understand.

*Sorry, make that FIVE baths.

I don't care how much recycled insulation or solar you use, this place does not fit any definition of green that I understand.

This seems unnecessarily conservative. Would it then be green if ten people lived there?

Yes, I think it would. What do you think?

"Yes, I think it would. What do you think?"

I would agree - Back in the 50's and 60's families of 4 typically lived in homes that were under 1500 sf.

That's 1/3 the space of this place: 1/3 the building materials, 1/3 the power to run the place, 1/3 the furnishings necessary to fill the place (not to mention 1/3 the shadow on the neigboring homes) - regardless of the source and impact of all of these.

I agree with Sally305.

Living "green" isn't only about what you use as a consumer, but also about how much you use as a consumer. I often feel like homes that have green materials but not green ethics are all for show and bragging rights....

I read some of the comments that were in the article online and I was so frustrated to read some of the things people were saying. It's because of articles like this that feature these kind of homes that people turn their noses up at designing green and are so misinformed. There is a lot more to going green than putting solar panels on your house. Having an elevator but not solar panels is neither here nor there. And building green doesn't have to be any more expensive than building a regular house. They did some things that are more extreme but there are a lot of things one can do that don't cost much. Green design is about designing smart not about using flashy expensive products. You can be green without using recycled glass tiles, or FSC certified wood floors.
I think people think there is a be-all end-all to designing green. There is never going to be a perfect green house, it's all about give and take. I do agree that having a large house that is "green" is somewhat of an oxy moron but then again there could be a very large green home that is more energy efficient, has better indoor air quality, and other green attributes than a standard house half it's size.
Maybe this didn't make much sense but I'm pretty passionate about education about green design and green living. Ignorance is not an excuse.

Looking at all the pics of the interior of the house was really interesting. Just beautiful. All of the spaces on AT's small cool designs would fit inside it. lol! It also has amazing views.