5 ms·

The size and extravagance of this thing is rather off-putting. I was expecting a modest off grid passive house.

• potatolicious 5y ago
  What gets me is that the space doesn't seem to get you very much - it's a 3-bedroom, 2.5-bath house. I dunno, maybe my thought is unrealistic - but if I were to splash out a ton of money for a palatial rural manse, I'd shoot for something with a bit more space than a large-ish suburban home. Especially because one of the most common uses of such a property is entertainment - forget having folks stay over unless you make the kids bunk?
  • pixiemagic 5y ago
    Yeah, that bit made no sense to me. I'm not familiar with the location but clearly it's rural and only accessible by car. They also were living in Vancouver which sounds quite far away, and presumably have friends/family there. So how are they going to be entertaining people all the time (they specifically mention entertaining large groups being important to them)? Come over for an evening, except one of you can't drink and has to drive 2 hours back at the end of the night??
    • potatolicious 5y ago
      Yep. My partner and I have had the same thoughts about having a property outside of the city that's large enough to entertain in. We jokingly call it The Compound - but there is something to the name I think in terms of how it needs to be designed to fulfill that need. At a bare minimum it needs to be large enough to have a guest suite - the central socializing spaces like the kitchen and living room also need to be scaled for that use. Ideally (assuming a grand budget) you can have separate structures for guests entirely. But certainly one has to assume that guests are bunking over, given how remote the location is. It seems eminently unreasonable to assume guests are driving several hours at the end of the evening.