Category Archives: McMansions

Catholic bishop in Germany removed after building new McMansion

Posted on by

Catholic priests living in McMansions are controversial and one German bishop was just removed from his post due to the uproar about his new large house:

Pope Francis on Wednesday permanently removed a German bishop from his Limburg diocese after his 31 million-euro ($43-million) new residence complex caused an uproar among the faithful.

Francis had temporarily expelled Monsignor Franz-Peter Tebartz-van Elst from Limburg in October pending a church inquiry.

At the center of the controversy was the price tag for the construction of a new bishop’s residence complex and related renovations. Tebartz-van Elst defended the expenditures, saying the bill was actually for 10 projects and there were additional costs because the buildings were under historical protection…

Francis has called on his priests and bishops to be models of sobriety in a church that “is poor and is for the poor.”

McMansions don’t get many favorable reviews for the average homebuyer so it is not too surprising they may be even more disliked for religious figures. But, this sounds like it could be more than just a personal McMansion in a suburban neighborhood and more about luxurious finishes and a larger complex. At the least, this is a good example of the term McMansion being used more in a moral judgment sense rather than strictly matching a home that has all of the typical American McMansion characteristics.

A suburban McMansion that looks like a castle

Posted on by

This is the sort of McMansion that can give the whole category of large suburban homes a bad name:

Words. There are none to describe this suburban mansion. This thing is literally a castle with a three car garage. We imagine you may be just as confused as we are, but there’s just something about being the king of this 10 acre domain that could be appealing to the right buyer. Built in 1990, this three story castle is no Neuschwanstein, but with four bedrooms and five and a half bathrooms spread over 8,500 square feet, you could lord over all of the other McMansions in the suburbs. Some of the more exciting features of the home include a swimming pool fit for royalty, a separate 10,000 square foot heated barn with eight horse stalls, and a spiral staircase in the master bedroom that leads to a freakin’ private turret overlooking the estate. This mansion-castle was initially listed in June 2011 for $1.8 million, and after taking three price cuts the home was removed from the market last December. It made its return to the market last Friday with an ask of $1.099 million and an option to purchase a total of 39 acres.

Quite the home. At least the castle motif is pretty consistent all the way around the house – not too much of an architectural mish-mash, just unusual to start.

Given the size of the home and property, it seems relatively cheap. However, it is only 59.5 miles to the middle of Chicago’s Loop…

You don’t have to loathe McMansions to support tiny houses

Posted on by

An interview with New Zealand actor/musician Bryce Langston about his interest in tiny houses includes his response to growing up in a McMansion:

8. Describe your childhood home.

I grew up in a McMansion, really. My parents have a large house on the Shore, four bedrooms, two lounges, an office. It was a great family home. I actually don’t loathe McMansions at all. I have seen wonderful large homes that have been constructed with great thought and care for the environment around them. They are just not a practical solution for all the people on the planet in a world with limited space and resources. The main problem is the debt associated with owning them. And the lack of freedom that comes with that debt…

10. Are you an evangelist for minimalism?

What I want to do is let people know there’s a choice. If you’re happy with how things are in your life and the work you do to pay for that then that’s fine. But lots of people aren’t. They’re really hurting and unhappy in their jobs and they don’t see a way out of being in debt for 30 years or whatever. People say you have to live in the real world, but the real tangible world is one where food does grow on trees and water falls from the sky and everything is provided for you to survive…

12. Will tiny houses take over the world one day?

That really depends on the path of human consciousness. If we grow into a culture that focuses on fair distribution of resources, care of the planet and pursuit of non-material happiness, then I think downsized homes will become normal. If our society continues down the path of uncontrolled material and economic growth, then it’s unlikely.

Langston offers some of the common critiques of McMansions – they are about materialism, they use too many resources, they put people in debt – while also noting that he enjoyed the large home he grew up in. If you read some of the criticisms of McMansions, it may be hard to imagine anyone could enjoy living in a McMansion.

There are also some religious and moral overtones here. Langston ties living in a home to larger issues in human life including defining success and what it means to achieve something. This isn’t unusual in discussing McMansions (see another example here or this recent case of a Catholic archibishop): homes could be considered necessary structures but they can also be places of meaning as well as important symbols for others to see.

Americans had biggest new houses ever in 2013

Posted on by

The National Association of Home Builders suggests Census data for 2013 shows Americans had the biggest new homes ever at over 2,600 square feet:

Preliminary data provided to NAHB by the Census Bureau on the characteristics of homes started in 2013 show the trend toward larger homes continued unabated last year, as did the share of new homes with 4+ bedrooms, 3+ full baths, 2-stories, or 3-car garages.  The average size of new homes started in 2013 was 2,679 square feet, about 150 square feet larger than in 2012 and the fourth consecutive annual increase since bottoming out at 2,362 square feet in 2009.

This is amazing. Housing, particularly bigger homes and McMansions, was fingered as a key reason the economy crashed in the late 2000s as too many residents and banks conspired to produce untenable mortgages. The housing market has struggled since. Yet, several years later, Americans now have even bigger than ever new houses. Why?

To get an answer, just take a look at WHO is buying new homes?  The typical new home buyer in recent years has been someone with strong credit scores and high levels of income.  To the first point, the graph below shows how the average credit rating of all US consumers has remained rather flat over the last few years (blue line), while the average credit rating of mortgage borrowers (red line) took a dramatic jump after 2007.  By 2013, the gap between the two measures was 58 points, compared to 33 points in the early 2000s.

To the second point, the graph below shows the rising trend in new home buyers’ income in recent years.  In 2005, the median income of new home buyers was $91,768.  By 2011, it had increased by more than 17% to $107,607.  It is not too surprising, therefore, to see home size and features continuing to trend upward, given that those buying new homes are precisely the kind of buyers who generally purchase large, feature-loaded homes.

In other words, the bifurcated housing market continues. Those with resources, more income and higher credit scores, can take advantage of these new homes builders are constructing because there is more profit to be made. In the meantime, the construction of smaller homes, those that might be more affordable or reasonable given the moral outrage over big homes in the 2000s, continues to lag behind. If the housing market is going, it is going on the strength of more expensive homes.

We need another piece of data to make this post from the NAHB complete: how do the housing starts in 2013 compare to those for each year since the early 2000s?

Can an old church be converted into a boring McMansion?

Posted on by

Curbed presents an example of an old church building with a so-called boring McMansion interior:

In a harrowing example of conversions gone wrong—or if not wrong at least boring—this stunning landmark church in Cleveland Heights, Ohio seems to have fallen victim to one very unholy makeover. Currently on the market for $439K, the three-bedroom, 2,635-square-foot home looks the same as always from the outside, but offers the dullest, boxiest new interiors imaginable—with a veritable sea of beige walls and oatmeal colored carpeting. Even the massive windows—the crowning glory of most church-to-home conversions—seem to be sporting some sort of weird framing over the lovely original glass. Sure, some of the blame can probably be shifted to the staging, but there’s just no getting around the general awkwardness of the layout.

Here is the problem with claiming that this is a McMansion: typically, the term McMansion is applied to exteriors. In that sense, this home has done everything right. They took an old church, presumably one that was no longer being used as a home for a religious congregation, kept the historic exterior, and only renovated the interior. The home is not ridiculously large; the listing says it is just over 2,600 square feet and the size is masked a bit by the building’s exterior. The church is in an older neighborhood so this renovation avoided either a teardown situation or building another McMansion on the exurban fringe. The home can’t immediately impress the average passer-by, supposedly a key feature for status-hungry McMansion owners, as they would probably think it is a church rather than a home.

Is an interior enough to make this renovated church a McMansion? I think one could complain about the interior design, particularly if it misses an opportunity to take advantage of a unique building, without placing it the category of McMansion which carries with it all sorts of other connotations.

Critiquing a high-security bunker McMansion in New York City

Posted on by

McMansions may be designed to impress but what happens if they are built in such a way to push away the outside world? See this example from New York City:

The massive, ground up 7,000-plus-square-foot West Village McMansion belonging to oil heiress Hyatt Bass and her screenwriter husband is being quietly shopped around, the Post has learned. There’s no official listing yet, but Bass hopes to fetch $35 million or more for the fortress home, which was built to be impenetrable following a 2007 incident in which Bass’s mother was held hostage in her own Connecticut abode. Since it was unveiled to the public last year, the bunker home, at Greenwich and West 12th Streets, has made headlines for its incongruous brutalist architecture and ultra-high security features.

Bass purchased the property for $7.5 million in 2001 and has reportedly never occupied the 802 Greenwich Street citadel. Earlier in the year, the compound was brought to our attention by a tipster for failing to shovel out front (Guess no one was there to turn on the heated sidewalks that were installed over the summer.) Someone who recently toured the property told the Post that the it feels “locked-in” and “weird” despite its well-appointed terrace and garden. We have a feeling that this home, built “specifically for this family around their security needs,” is likely to have a hard time selling. When it does, we hope the new owners throw a cornice or any other kind of architectural detail on the misplaced stronghold in the heart of the historic district.

This large home seems to share the odd architectural stylings that tend to mark McMansions. Yet, that odd architecture is often intended to show something positive about the owner, to represent some marker of success or wealth. But, this particular combination of architecture is intended to clearly set the house apart from the public even though it is in a very public setting. Is this even a more in-your-face McMansion because it intentionally pushes people away? Could a home be built that combines the security features found here, the size of this home, and a more welcoming exterior or does privileging security necessarily lead to an outcome like this?

What happens if a Catholic archbishop moves to a New Jersey McMansion in retirement?

Posted on by

“A Catholic archibishop moves into a McMansion for his retirement…” might be the start of a joke or it may be this story from New Jersey:

The 4,500-square-foot home sits on 8.2 wooded acres in the hills of Hunterdon County. With five bedrooms, three full bathrooms, a three-car garage and a big outdoor pool, it’s valued at nearly $800,000, records show.

But it’s not quite roomy enough for Newark Archbishop John J. Myers.

Myers, who has used the Franklin Township house as a weekend residence since the archdiocese purchased it in 2002, is building a three-story, 3,000-square-foot addition in anticipation of his retirement in two years, The Star-Ledger found. He will then move in full-time, a spokesman for the archbishop said.

The new wing, now just a wood frame, will include an indoor exercise pool, a hot tub, three fireplaces, a library and an elevator, among other amenities, according to blueprints and permits filed with the Franklin Township building department.

There are quite a few details about the house in this story. It sounds like a fairly lavish McMansion but there are plenty of similar homes in New Jersey, a state closely tied to McMansions due to its many suburbanites as well as the famous Soprano McMansion.

However, there is also a lot of questioning of why an archibishop needs such a lavish house. The issue isn’t just that this is a big or poorly-designed house. Rather, this is a moral issue. Shouldn’t priests live simply and serve God rather than live it up in a McMansion paid for by church members? If purchasing a McMansion is excessive spending for an average American and threatens to throw off their retirements, how much more so is it for an archbishop? This could lead to an interesting conversation of just what kind of housing priests should live in to best pursue their vocation and provide the image the church wants to project.

McMansions can derail your retirement plans

Posted on by

Amidst concerns baby boomers will have difficulty selling their homes, here is a suggestion that buying a McMansion can derail retirement plans:

We occasionally hear about a friend who somehow saved up enough money, or just decided to chuck it, and walks off to retire at age 60, 55 or even 50. It can be done.

Also, some people live in a McMansion, drive a Tesla, and vacation in the south of France. But we know it’s a very expensive lifestyle. And we know we all can’t afford it, as the real estate bust of the 2000s so cruelly reminded us. We need to appreciate that, like buying a McMansion, taking early retirement is a very expensive proposition. Yes, a fortunate few can afford it. But most of us just have to get real.

Two things are interesting here. The first is that purchasing a McMansion seriously hampers retirement plans. Purchasing one uses up a lot of money and saddles the owner with a large mortgage (plus the home might be underwater and it can cost a lot to fill such a large home). A more prudent investor would purchase a more modest home rather than splurging on a McMansion.

The second interesting part of this is the comparison to owning a Tesla or vacationing in France, both relatively rare things. For example, Teslas start around $70,000 and only about 22,500 were sold in 2013. In the 2000s, it was common to see McMansion purchases compared to SUVs, a mass production item that cost much less than a Tesla. The implication then is that McMansions are even rarer today, making it even more of a folly to own one.

Decreasing interest in McMansions in Melbourne, Australia

Posted on by

The demand for McMansions has decreased in recent years in Melbourne:

MELBURNIANS are moving away from McMansions with the number of medium density home approvals in Victoria growing a whopping 109.5 per cent over five years.

The Bankwest Housing Density report shows that 23,390 medium density approvals were granted in Victoria in the past 12 months. Five years ago that number was just 11,164…

KPMG Australia demographer Bernard Salt said Melbourne, in particular, was densing up.

“A new generation of Generation Y and X have different values to preceding generation that wanted a three-bedroom brick veneer on the edge of town,” Mr Salt said.

This and other stories I’ve seen in recent months from Australia seem to suggest that the McMansion craze may have run its course. Older adults wanted to have the big house outside the city but for a variety of reasons, including a change in preferences among younger Australians, interest in smaller housing, and interest in more affordable units, fewer McMansions have been built.

What will be interesting to observe is whether the McMansion paths in the United States and Australia diverge in the future. Does the average Australian want to join the United States and leave a legacy of McMansions?

Another contender for “The Anti-McMansion”

Posted on by

Combine a tiny house and minimalist design and the New York Times gives you another contender for an anti-McMansion:

Living in a one-room house with an ultra-minimalist aesthetic and two small children sounds more like the setup for a joke than something any reasonably sane person would attempt.

And yet that’s exactly what Takaaki and Christina Kawabata set out to do when they renovated an old house here. They were convinced that an open space with as few toys and material possessions as possible was a recipe not for disaster, but for domestic calm…

“Most of the people we’ve invited here are shocked by how we live,” Ms. Kawabata, 41, said. “How we can raise kids without toys and clutter and stuff everywhere.”…

Eventually, there will be an addition, a 1,500-square-foot structure that may be connected to the main house with an open walkway. But that’s a few years off. For now, instead of walls, the family makes do with transparent room dividers created out of metal frames wrapped with nylon string.

There are three features that set up this home apart from conceptions of a McMansion:

1. A smaller size. This one-room house has 1,200 square feet. It is interesting to note that the home will eventually include another 1,500 square feet which would then put it above the average for a new American home at 2,500 square feet.

2. A different and better design. Rather than having spaces for everyone to do their own thing, this home is one big open space where the family is always together. Additionally, the minimalist design is presumed to be better aesthetically (and presumably in durability and appeal to others) than the typical McMansion attempt to impress and mash together numerous styles.

3. The commitment to live with less stuff. McMansions might be so large because even as the average American household has decreased in size, the average new home has increased dramatically in order to hold more consumer goods.

At the same time, I would guess most Americans would not accept this particular design as the best anti-McMansion: it is too open (do household members want to be that close?) and minimalist design does not appeal to everybody.