Is this house an eyesore

[Orcus]

I agree. I can't stand these bloody "architect's wet dreams" but, hey, it's not my house to complain about really, is it? Nor is it my money being used to pay for it. However...

If I've bought into a nice rural area for the character of its olde worlde charm - yeah, I might take exception to some glass-fronted monstrosity being put together next to me too.

Add to that: Pembrokeshire is a highly-prized and sought-after area to buy into...

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

I personally feel that if it's their property, they should be able to built a house however they want, up to a certain point, yes. I wouldn't be too keen on the idea of a 25,000 sq. ft. home down the street from me though lol.

Now, i don't think that the house in question is all that bad.

 

[Holdfast]

Now, i don't think that the house in question is all that bad.

In itself no, but it is a question of character in the setting it's in.

I find myself undecided about this issue. On one hand, I quite strongly believe in the man's home is his castle. But on the other hand, I sure wouldn't want another house in the area bringing down my home's property value because that other home affected the character (and therefore desirability) of the area.

So I can't really decide on the particular property in the thread. I'm leaning towards it being out of character and therefore the planning officers are correct in enforcing the rules. If you want to build a property like that, build it somewhere where it blends in.

However, planning regs in this country as a whole still need to revised and simplified, regardless of this particular case.

 

[Sector 7]

I have never bought into the whole "character of the neighborhood" issue. One man's hovel is another man's castle. In the Carolinas, USA it is common to see a decrepit mobile home next to a brand new large brick home. For this reason I chose property outside of a housing development. No one could tell me what kind of home to build.

Friends of mine chose to buy in a housing development, later they found out they were not permitted to put up a satellite dish (small one) nor an outside antenna. Either they paid for cable TV or did without. They also received a fine from the Home Owner's Association because they had too many Christmas lights on their home. That is ridiculous! I decorate how I want, when I want, etc.

 

[Holdfast]

I have never bought into the whole "character of the neighborhood" issue. One man's hovel is another man's castle. In the Carolinas, USA it is common to see a decrepit mobile home next to a brand new large brick home. For this reason I chose property outside of a housing development. No one could tell me what kind of home to build.

Friends of mine chose to buy in a housing development, later they found out they were not permitted to put up a satellite dish (small one) nor an outside antenna. Either they paid for cable TV or did without. They also received a fine from the Home Owner's Association because they had too many Christmas lights on their home. That is ridiculous! I decorate how I want, when I want, etc.

Well, it's less of an issue in America, I grant you, because outside for a few older metropolitan areas, everything is so very new that it hasn't really developed a long-standing multi-layered character intrinsically worth preserving due to its age/tradition.

The other issue is that the particular property mentioned in the OP is in a National Park area, which generally have much stricter planning criteria than non-Park areas.

When you build/buy in these areas, you have to take on board the inherent restrictions of what you're buying into. Similarly your friends who bought in the housing development should have read the regulations of the development before purchase and if they couldn't agree with it, shouldn't have bought there.

To some extent planning regs are very important. For instance, I live in a Grade II listed building which means there are certain things I can and can't do to the property due to its character/age/historical value. That's fine by me, but wouldn't be right for everyone. Just gotta know what you're getting into when you buy.

 

[stoneroses]

It looks like it would belong to a chav who won a million on the lotto.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Well, it's less of an issue in America, I grant you, because outside for a few older metropolitan areas, everything is so very new that it hasn't really developed a long-standing multi-layered character intrinsically worth preserving due to its age/tradition.

We do have the National Register of Historic Places here, and I imagine a lot of things on the list are more "recent" than what would merit that status in Europe. For us, this list is VERY important because people in America have a tendency to take a wrecking ball to anything, to build something newer.

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

Not too hail-friendly, but it looks cool. I wish they'd just let people do what they want to on their own property as long at doesn't threaten public safety.

 

[MANT!]

Looks like several McMansions out on Lake Tahoe...(Ihappen to think they don't belong)...

 

[scotpens]

Compared to the gaudy, ostentations McMansions that have sprouted like toadstools in Southern California suburbs, that glass house in Pembrokeshire is in quiet good taste.

 

[Pegaritaville]

I seem to be in the minority here, but I think it should be torn down. Not so much that's it's gaudy, but that apparently the owners knew they were stepping over the line when they built it.

I live on a scenic riverway (St. Croix, which forms the northern half of the Wisconsin/Minnesota border), and there are rules we're supposed to follow. It pisses me off to no end when people with big bucks (Stanley Hubbard of Hubbard Broadcasting comes to mind here) try to get away with crap.

So Yeah, it's an eyesore. And I'm pretty sure the owners knew the regulations before they decided to build that monstrosity.

 

[trekkiedane]

Friends of mine chose to buy in a housing development, later they found out they were not permitted to put up a satellite dish (small one) nor an outside antenna. Either they paid for cable TV or did without. They also received a fine from the Home Owner's Association because they had too many Christmas lights on their home. That is ridiculous! I decorate how I want, when I want, etc.

When you build/buy in these areas, you have to take on board the inherent restrictions of what you're buying into. Similarly your friends who bought in the housing development should have read the regulations of the development before purchase and if they couldn't agree with it, shouldn't have bought there.

To some extent planning regs are very important. For instance, I live in a Grade II listed building which means there are certain things I can and can't do to the property due to its character/age/historical value. That's fine by me, but wouldn't be right for everyone. Just gotta know what you're getting into when you buy.

This is where my parents live:

Antennas and satellite dishes (and parked cars) are forbidden in that part of town, as are numerous other things that would change the appearance of the houses; If you want new windows or a new front door or a change of colour on your house you can apply for permission with the town and the owners association. If what you want to do is not subtracting from the aesthetics of the area and your neighbours don't object you are allowed to do so.

My parents' house had a chimney... they wanted that ting removed from the middle of their living-room, which -being an indoors thing- they of course could do but they had to put up a fake chimney top on the roof in order to comply with regulations of the area -which is a bit silly as their house was built in the 1970's (unlike most of the other houses which are as old as they look).

On the flip-side though; they are allowed to fly the swallow-tails (normally reserved for official use):

As opposed to the 'normal' flag:

As Holdfast said: "Just gotta know what you're getting into when you buy."

 

[Tora Ziyal]

^What a beautiful neighborhood, Julemand! I'd love to live somewhere w/ that atmosphere.

What is the significance of the swallow tails?

 

[trekkiedane]

^What a beautiful neighborhood, Julemand! I'd love to live somewhere w/ that atmosphere.

Thank you.

What is the significance of the swallow tails?

The 'Splitflag' (flag w. swallow tails) is an official flag, normally reserved for national buildings (and events), it is similar in design to the royal flag (which has the morarch's coat of arms in a white square in the middle of the cross) and the navy flag (which has a darker shade of red).

More on Wikipedia.

It is -generally- considered more 'festive'

As you can see in this seasonal image (which I swiped from the "Christmass Tree" article on Wikipedia):

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Now, i don't think that the house in question is all that bad.

In itself no, but it is a question of character in the setting it's in.

I find myself undecided about this issue. On one hand, I quite strongly believe in the man's home is his castle. But on the other hand, I sure wouldn't want another house in the area bringing down my home's property value because that other home affected the character (and therefore desirability) of the area.

So I can't really decide on the particular property in the thread. I'm leaning towards it being out of character and therefore the planning officers are correct in enforcing the rules. If you want to build a property like that, build it somewhere where it blends in.

I'm with you on that in general, but in this case I was expecting a neighborhood full of quaint little cottages where this house stood out like a glass leviathan. Instead the camera pulled back to reveal more of a hodgepodge of different styles and sizes than the furniture in a bachelor's first apartment:

I don't know if they really need to protect the architectural integrity of the house that looks like a narrow four-story fire training tower, or the rest that look like they were squeezed into every available square foot of land like sardines. Clearly they weren't as worried about appearance when they were trying to sell as much waterfront property as humanly possible.

The house seems to have a smaller footprint than that tarp-covered home (presumably under construction as well) in the wide shot, and when seen from a distance doesn't seem to dwarf its neighbors.

Personally a big glass facade like that makes more sense when you live on the beach or facing a great view that doesn't include houses directly in front of you (although being on the hill at least lets them see over the one-story in front of them), but it's hardly a monstrosity or that out of place in the neighborhood. We have tons of houses like that on the beach here in California, and in the hills and mountains.

 

[Franklin]

As long as the owner's don't walk around in front of all those windows at night naked with all the lights on, who should care?

Hell, none of those houses seem to fit in with each other. They all look like they were just dropped there without much thought.

 

[Captain Shaw]

Now, i don't think that the house in question is all that bad.

In itself no, but it is a question of character in the setting it's in.

I find myself undecided about this issue. On one hand, I quite strongly believe in the man's home is his castle. But on the other hand, I sure wouldn't want another house in the area bringing down my home's property value because that other home affected the character (and therefore desirability) of the area.

So I can't really decide on the particular property in the thread. I'm leaning towards it being out of character and therefore the planning officers are correct in enforcing the rules. If you want to build a property like that, build it somewhere where it blends in.

I'm with you on that in general, but in this case I was expecting a neighborhood full of quaint little cottages where this house stood out like a glass leviathan. Instead the camera pulled back to reveal more of a hodgepodge of different styles and sizes than the furniture in a bachelor's first apartment:

I don't know if they really need to protect the architectural integrity of the house that looks like a narrow four-story fire training tower, or the rest that look like they were squeezed into every available square foot of land like sardines. Clearly they weren't as worried about appearance when they were trying to sell as much waterfront property as humanly possible.

The house seems to have a smaller footprint than that tarp-covered home (presumably under construction as well) in the wide shot, and when seen from a distance doesn't seem to dwarf its neighbors.

Personally a big glass facade like that makes more sense when you live on the beach or facing a great view that doesn't include houses directly in front of you (although being on the hill at least lets them see over the one-story in front of them), but it's hardly a monstrosity or that out of place in the neighborhood. We have tons of houses like that on the beach here in California, and in the hills and mountains.

I think once the garden is done, it will fit right in.

 

[tharpdevenport]

The house itself looks fine, but among the lay of the land seen in the picture, it does stand at odds.

 

[Holdfast]

...

Your parents live a lovely setting! I like the quirky tradition regarding the different flags too.

blah blah blah

I'm with you on that in general, but in this case I was expecting a neighborhood full of quaint little cottages where this house stood out like a glass leviathan. Instead the camera pulled back to reveal more of a hodgepodge of different styles and sizes than the furniture in a bachelor's first apartment.

I don't know; I'd still say it seems out of place to me. Obviously not to the extent you were expecting, but still odd enough to be questionable.

 

[trekkiedane]

...

Your parents live a lovely setting! I like the quirky tradition regarding the different flags too.

I live just around the corner from that part of town. In fact, I live across the street from the oldest church in town¹, which -for all intents and purposes- is as old as the part of town in the image I posted (though in a building only very little older than a century).
If it weren't for all the Japanese (and North American ) tourists with all of their digital imaging equipment this part of town (H. C. Andersen used to live here and his museum is located in (and around) the house he lived in) would be downright idyllic

"Oh, people actually live here?" isn't a rare exclamation, from people sitting on the step outside their front door, my parents claim

As to the flag: well, being the oldest national flag still in use it has picked up a few odd quirks along the way...
_______________________
¹) My view of it last winter: