There is no defense for that house . . . picket or otherwise.

whaas, I appreciate your concern. But a house on a public street is out there for review, not unlike art in a public place. If this was a sculpture in a park, it would be fair game, would it not?

I have to agree with what the others have said. When I put my art out on the net or in a gallery, I realize that some will love it and a few might think it's awful. Both views are valid, especially if both can articulate why the work is good or bad. (For example, you don't like my still life drawing because the placement of the objects is jarring, or everything is the same height or the values are to similar.)

I believe I have (and others) have articulated what makes this house poorly designed. Hopefully while we jest about it, we can all learn from it too.

cpartist

Is that what the article said?

That's what the designer, an architectural technologist, is quoted as saying. However, the renderings of some of the proposed homes don't convey the same, uh, eclecticism.

AFAIK, he is not the creator of Potato Head.

Needs moar Marry Poppins.

Hi worthy/capartis,

Its all good, I'm just a homeowner looking in from the outside. On the surface it seemed like a form of invading someone's privacy. It they posted it out on the web it would be a bit different.

If I remember Canadian law correctly, an architectural technologist (sometimes known as a building technologist) is not a licensed architect, but rather a graduate of a three-year technology curriculum. According to Wiki, to become an architectural technologist, a three-year diploma (or equivalent) in Architectural Technology is required, followed by structured professional and occupational experience. There is no parallel occupational niche in the United States, where in most states it is illegal to call oneself an "architect" or to advertise or offer "architectural services" unless one is a licensed architect in that state.

WARNING!! Topic drift.

no parallel occupational niche in the United States

Explaining the proliferation of stock plan vendors sellingtoUS owner-builders. Very little of that here. Even some of the largest Canadian tract builders use independent architectural technology firms rather than in-house architects. As I've mentioned before, for a 5,000-8,000 sf plan, I'm looking at $20K-$25K for an arch. tech. vs. $85K-$150K+++ for a "name" architect.

Not topic drift. My point, simply, is that many people use the term "architect" loosely and without an understanding of who is actually an architect, what is required to become an architect and what an architect does, as opposed to the wide range of "others" in the home design and build industry. Because there is a wide range of folks, besides architects, with vastly different education, training, experience and interests/skills, there are all sorts of homes which are designed and built--some very well designed and constructed and some, like the one illustrated at the top of the thread, not so much. The home featured in this thread is one which we may reasonably conclude is produced by someone with little architectural education, understanding or care for architectural history and creative design. One might even say the home pictured was designed by someone whose marketing priorities and values far outweigh her/his architectural design abilities. But, as you point out, they don't charge as much! Caveat emptor!

Really, worthy, what exactly was the topic that is now drifting??

Of course, other than posting a photo of somebody's HOME, so that it can be mocked.

A very wise friend of mine - says - while explaining differing tastes:

"That's why God made chocolate and vanilla"

While this may not be "our" collective cup of tea, and may not follow "rules" of architecture - the bottom line is that folks are BUYING THIS. Thus, it's being rewarded. So instead of critiquing that architect - we should be more critical of the taste of folks that can afford this home. Architects gotta eat, too, ya know.

;-)

Whoever designed the striking home being discussed was a professional designer or architect. (This is one of many similar homes in a large subdivision, not a one-off by an owner-builder.)

I'm certainly not mocking the homeowner; they did not design the house. And in fact, they will make a lot of money selling it.

My daughter laughingly remarked to me yesterday that every day I walk through our current home I recite a litany of mistakes, inadequacies, defects and design flaws. I didn't design or build it. Only hope I live long enough to see it beaten into rubble and gone to landfill!

I think the important thing to remember is that as these homes with their mashed-up styles continue to proliferate, they will one day be granted their own 'style name' and may even find a place revered in history! They may not be *my* taste, but neither are many of the 'classic' styles.

@Worthy - I hope your last paragraph is in jest - I'd hope everyone who lives in a home can see past some of the (inevitable) flaws and just enjoy their home.

While this may not be "our" collective cup of tea, and may not follow "rules" of architecture - the bottom line is that folks are BUYING THIS.

Or as my dear ex FIL (I love my ex MIL and FIL. It's the ex I couldn't tolerate.) used to say, "If someone made it, someone will buy it."

I think the important thing to remember is that as these homes with their mashed-up styles continue to proliferate, they will one day be granted their own 'style name' and may even find a place revered in history!

Like the names of the new mansions? McMansions?

The fact that something sells is hardly the test of creative design...or even good taste!

The bottom line is the building featured in this thread is poorly designed. Hopefully everyone can see it, or websites like this will educate everyone to what is good architecture and the value of a good architect.

Or...the flipside is that the general population will continue to care less about what the exterior looks like, and more that the interior meets their needs.

As someone who did a lot of research on aesthetics and proper proportions, detailing etc for her house, I also fully realize - most houses in my city are a 'local vernacular' with the huge garage and cabover bedroom. As long they get their stone counters, hardwood floors, and stainless steel appliances, most people around me don't give a crap about what the exterior of their home looks like. I don't think we can say its 'wrong' to care less about their exterior - afterall, their neighbors have to look at it more than them!* Trying to convince the population otherwise may work in some cases, but not in many others. Live and let live - if they like their house, don't rag on them for it!

* I lived for a short bit in a rural community where all the houses were identical, except different colors. We called it 'rainbow village' because it went blue house, green house, yellow house, pink house....the advice I was given was 'pick the house color you hate the most - then you wont have to look at it!'

To call this the work of a true classically trained Architect is on par with some Houzzer bombarding this column with their insights on pillow colors, and saying they contribute as a writer for Houzz! Unfortunately when these buildings become part of the suburban landscape they effectively become the norm by sheer quantity alone. Good design gets lost as it becomes more and more out of reach to the consumer. And we get left with this.

worthy: Only hope I live long enough to see it beaten into rubble and gone to landfill!

lookintomyeyes83: I hope your last paragraph is in jest

Au contraire!

Is that an update photo of the building featured in this thread??

No looks like its still for sale

http://www.century21.ca/atriarealty/Property/ON/L4H3X5/Vaughan/408_Woodgate_Pines_Dr_2

So, no publicity is bad publicity, eh, Jim Rockford?

At least the interior is at the same level of design as the exterior.

OMG Mark!!! I was literally just coming on to say something similar. I do like the red chairs in the kitchen.

I've seen worse. It's big. Ppl like big. And Toronto is hella expensive. It will sell.

Worthy: you seem to have a grasp of architectural standards beyond your average mortgage specialist... I'm curious about your background? Ah, after some snooping I see you are a spec builder. Interesting....

Thank you. Flattery (and a good credit rating) will get you everywhere!

Also, formerly, a real estate editor and writer, including a best-selling book on Canadian real estate investment, a licensed real estate broker, homebuilder and renovator; multi-property landlord and equity mortgage manager. (Or this being the net, I just made all that up.)

Just wandered over to look at the pictur....oh my.....

Also, formerly, a real estate editor and contributor for leading publications, (e.g., Financial Post, Globe & Mail)
author of a best-selling book on Canadian real estate investment, a
licensed real estate broker, homebuilder and renovator; multi-property
landlord and equity mortgage manager. (Or this being the net, I just
made all that up.)

I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express. Top that!

Uh, I knew the young lady who created the Jello Tree?

Vewwwwy interesting

I absolutely love this house. I submit that this house simply must be a satirical statement on the constant one-upmanship that is so prevalent in houses for people in certain economic ranges.

OMG. Million plus price range and single, CHEAPO light fixtures in every room. Back yard is useless, too.

bry911

Like Alex Chinneck's mind-bending buildings?

the various upside-down homes around the world?

the toilet building?

The architectural equivalent of a William Hung or Sanjaya of American Idol fame?

(I'll spare you an aural link!)

Valiant effort! But I think it's missing the self-awareness of true artistry.

That shows the variation in markets. Here the house would sell for maybe for 400K.

It always makes me chuckle when people ask on these discussions, "How much will it cause to remodel my basement?"

I am just saying that too many people aspire to this

Someone out there sees that house as a great stepping stone to their next McMansion.

Now that's a roof! ^

It's a roofer's retirement plan...

Roof diarrhea.

Three Cheers !

Mr. Potato Head went for his full asking price--C$1,599,990.

Credit no doubt to the many admiring comments here on Houzz.

(BTW, add to that price our Provincial Land Transfer Tax of C$28,474.80. If this were a sale by the builder there would also have been a 13% Harmonized Sales Tax minus a $24,000 rebate. That's another C$183,998.70.)

Wow...okay.

We live in an expensive part of the US. Scary what prices are.

Harmonized Sales Tax? A Barbershop Quartet sings at your closing? How very civilized Canadians are :) hey, I married one. Canadian, not barbershopper.

Yes, a brilliant euphemism for a simple process:

No one said having money automatically gives you good taste.

Its not that eclecticism is bad; its just that combing the ideas of other designers from past eras and cultures can so easily lead to a loss of the charm, proportion and balance of the originals. And you would not know that if you were not familiar with the originals which I doubt is part of a technology school's curriculm and certainly of little concern to online plan marketers.

And you would not know that if you were not familiar with the originals

OMG, now you're reminding me of all my art history classes with slide after slide and Professor Gardner (yes that Gardner for art history geeks) droning on and on. I caught up on a lot of sleep in his classes and then had to cram with his book.

This video is a great introduction to the study of architecture and how the concepts are still valid today and more relevant than the copying of features.

I am a little weirded out by the fact the OP found out about this from a job looking at mortgage applications. I like to imagine there is some sort of confidentiality in financial services.

Anyway, I *LIKE* the house. A bit over the top, but I like the...gothic castle look. It beets the beige boxy industrial crap I see all the time. Any house totally on trend will be so of it's time it will seem horribly dated in a decade. At least people will react to this house the same way in ten years as they do today. I am concerned about the valleys between the roof peaks. (Snow could accumulate) and the difficulty replacing curved windows and keeping them from leaking.

There are a lot of houses much more horrible, but in a subtle way. "Roof diarrhea" is a much more significant engineering problem. I just saw a house where the peaked garage roof was attached to the wall of the house and sloped directly towards the siding. Directed the flow of water to the siding, and I can imagine what would happen after a couple snowstorms.

I like to imagine there is some sort of confidentiality in financial services.

This was a "comp" near the subject property and there's no information here that anyone with an internet connection couldn't pull up in micro-seconds; though the sale price would require a subscription or Real Estate Board connection.