>the 10-year-after build quality of the homes I've seen have been effectively on par with McMansions if not better. "on par with McMansions" is not good. One o

>the 10-year-after build quality of the homes I've seen have been effectively on par with McMansions if not better. "on par with McMansions" is not good. One of the big criticisms of McMansions is the build quality is very poor and the materials used are very, very cheap. For example, from the same site, http://www.mcmansionhell.com/post/149128564511/mclean-virginia http://www.mcmansionhell.com/post/149128564511/mclean-virgin... >Barely ten years old, and this house has already sustained all kinds of damage due to poor construction quality. It’s extremely sad when you think about what could’ve been built in place of this house, which wasn’t even built to last ten more years. A house with a life expectancy under a hundred years is a sad house indeed.