Some of the rooms are gorgeous; but the pitcher and that huge chandelier over the couch would have to go. Maybe they were just used for the photo shoot to add some drama.

Whoa - the pitcher completely monopolizes the counter to the left of the sink. It is unnecessarily distracting and pompous. The chandelier is just ugly. I thought it was over the couch too until I realized the dining table was behind it.

The decorator had some beautiful touches but those oversize pieces are disconcerting. The two lamps on pedestals flanking the window need to go too.

The house is gorgeous!

I like everything except the "Graphic Chandelier" of wire. The one with the shade is fine. The pitcher is interesting and moveable, so that doesn't bother me.

The sofa arrangement in the window niche is lovely.

I think this house may belong to a neighbor of one of our friends here in GW. I'll let her decide whether to mention it since it gives away her location.

Think Chandy too big and crystal might be better. Loved the pitcher but immediately realized I couldn't work with that thing in MY kitchen. But I suspect the owner doesn't cook so gynormous pitcher prob Ok

The brobdingnagian pitcher in the kitchen is farcical, as is the dining chandelier. What's utterly ridiculous is the little blue tuffet! Who gets relegated to THAT seat at the table?!

Overall, the house is beautiful, the the decorating is affected to me, as I prefer a more organic and functional approach.

A kid?

I dont like the oversize pitcher, it looks way too big, but I actually like size of the chandelier, just not that chandelier, maybe a large crystal one. I agree with her about small things being chatty and she calls it, I call it busy and cluttered. I would rather see a few large items in a room than a bunch of small ones.

dyhgarden, if so, perhaps you can relay a message and find out if the neighbor actually has that pitcher, or if it was staged for the photo shoot. I'd be most curious.

I like the pitcher; it's just a fun farce to have in the kitchen.

Actually ... I love it all! Yes, even the ginormous pitcher. It's fun and completely unexpected. Yeah, the chandy is huge but I think it still works in a way that's just very unique. Then again, I have a chandy that I initially thought would have to go due to its extra large scale but I've since fallen in love with it and appreciate the bit of "drama" it lends to an otherwise quite ordinary dining area.

I could easily live in this home. I think it's stunning. All of it. :-)

I love the chandelier - it's unique and definitely a statement piece. It can always be changed if one decided he or she didn't like it. But of now, I love it. As for the oversized pitcher - yeah it's big but it doesn't bother me.

The chandelier and pitcher do not bother me. Beautiful home. The thing I didn't like is the rugs covering so much of the flooring.

I am with TR...I love almost all of it. Very pretty! The back courtyard looks wonderful!

Maybe the pitcher is actually sitting on an upscale drying rack....lol.

I love it all, even the oversized elements, which i find interesting and provocative.

The limited color palette is what I could not live with though, I would always feel almost anything from a book to a handbag to my sweater would upset the balance.

I will move in immediately! haha I like it. It is not my style but still beautiful. Funny, upon first glance I did not even notice the pitcher. I guess for photographing it just fit in with scale and interest of the space.

The pitcher looks as if it's in one of those bad real estate pics where someone has photoshopped it in, to fill a blank space. The wire chandelier is too low, IMO, but from the wide shot, I think it looks OK in the room.

The pitcher is silly, imo, but i think all the lights are sized correctly. You need big lights for the volume and scale of those rooms and i love them all.

I love the luxe feel of all the decor and could easily live in that house. Except for the drapes around the bed! I would suffocate with all the air blocked off when the drapes were closed. It was quite humorous to me to read the caption about the dining room chandy. Everyone said the chandy was too large, and the designer said "wait until the furniture arrives." I can imagine when that tiny table arrived no one said, "oh yeah now I see where you're going with that." LOL. Also, the chandy over the sofa is ridiculous, imo. That would have to be moved.

agree, the pitcher and chandy are too big- if they were mine and i had to keep one, i would leave the chand, altho i really don't care for the style-- but, the pitcher just looks ridiculous, imo

The house is gorgeous. The pitcher and it's stand look out of place but would be a cool piece to have somewhere, if you can lift it. Still undecided about the chandy, but I was expecting a larger table for sure. And I don't like the ridiculous blue stool there. Looking at it from the LR, the chandy just overpowers everything.

I can't envision kids in that house, but it says it is a young family's house.

With that house, I'd imagine there are maids, cooks and nannies! It doesn't say "soccer mom" to me ;-)

Just to be clear, there is no chandy over the sofa...there is the one large chandy over the dining table that is behind but open to the seating area with the sofa.

From the long shot, pic 2, note the large corinthian capitals in the corner of the dining area....I didn't realize they were actually lamps until the close up of the dining room in pic 5.

LOL, but hey, it says "young family" but maybe the kids are much better behaved/trained than mine, plus DH.

Annie, I took a second looksie and see my mistake. I was wondering how they got a smaller, identical chandy for the living area. :)

Mimi, I have a tuffet.

I didn't mind the scale on anything except the large pitcher in the kitchen because I would never give up 3 feet of counter space to a decorative item.

don't care for the pitcher or chandy. Or the two blue lamps on the sofa table. "Graphic" is an interesting choice of word, and one with an unintended but accurate connotation, to describe that monster of a chandelier. While the rooms are mainly pleasing, I find the limited color palette a little contrived. (I usually don't have problems with limited colors or even a monochromatic look, just have a problem with this one.)

kswl2

Mimi, I have a tuffet.

******

That's nice.

I think the pitcher is hilarious, someone has a sense of humor. I like the home very much.

My boys would have had a grand time doing jump shots with wads of crumpled up paper into the chandelier "basket." No thanks, I'll take a run-of-the-mill chandy please.

The house is beautiful and photographs well.

It's a beautiful home, although really not to my taste......and while I don't like that particular chandy, the overall scale doesn't bother me - after all we chose something of similar gigantic proportions for the kitchen at our last house!!!

I think the DR chandy is really ugly, and I'm having trouble separating my reaction to its size from its aesthetics. I think the size would bother me a little, but not a lot, if I liked the fixture more.

"Farcical" is exactly the right word to describe my assessment of the pitcher.

I hated all of it except the exterior. It is so not my taste, and I really dislike mismatched seating at dining tables, and I particularly dislike benches of any kind at dining tables. It was so uncoordinated that it reminded me of being in a thrift store.

I think it may have regional appeal, but I do not live in that region. I believe that styles often vary greatly with geography. However, when I visited Seattle and Vancouver in the late 1970s and early 1980s, I noticed that the geography was similar but the styles were drastically different. I loved Vancouver and found Seattle boring, but I think Seattle may have caught up by now.

Not my style, nor anybody else's I know. Decor is more contemporary in our area, unless one is going deliberately retro.

Well she did want an atmosphere that was a little bit foggy for the house which for me she attained as I don't know what she was trying to attain. She also likes large quiet things as opposed to small chattery things. I do find that the chandelier over the table is both large and very chattery.

Too much stuff that doesn't pleasantly flow or tie in to other objects in the room. Well, there are the matching table lamps in the living room on the sofa table that are way to high.

I think it is gorgeous! The overscale items add interest, and personally I prefer a very few oversized things to a bunch of smaller items....little things look dinky and cluttery to me. I abhor anything remotely cluttery. :)

I found it interesting that the decorator, Ferrier, used a similar chandelier in a home in FL. The other one is antique brass instead of bronze and somewhat more ornate, but the overall feel and scale is the same. You can see it in the Veranda article about the best of 2015 (that was linked at the top of this story.) Neither one appeals to me.

I love the house!!! What I particularly liked is the living area where there were floors lamps beside chairs so each space was a nice place to read. I think the chandy is gorgeous but I felt it was too big. The pitcher looked ridiculous IMO. I can't imagine taking up that much counter space for an item that can't possibly be useful. You would need a crane to pick the darn thing up. I also though the painting and hydrangeas in the first pic was swoon worthy!

I no longer live in MB, but know the house. The exterior is absolutely gorgeous. The grounds are equally attractive. Ferrier is a partner of McAlpine (born in AL, original office was/is in Montgomery). He designs furniture and she uses it in each interior design job. A lot of it looks uncomfortable to me - straight backs, no backs, etc. They are both incredibly talented people. That said, I don't care for everything they do/use. Especially most of the oversized item. If you don't care for the DR chandelier, how do you feel about this one she used in her own ATL home?

I wouldn't be able to enjoy the space for fear of it falling on my head!

I remember when this house was featured in Veranda. I'm sure the pitcher was just there for staging, as are the rest of the larger pieces that would be in the way for normal day-to-day living. Whether or not the homeowner owns might be listed in the back of the magazine, but the Veranda link said Formations which is out of Los Angeles.

Yikes, Allison, that fixture is downright frightening!

That is a beautiful home although the cool toned and delicate decor is not for me. The pitcher I find silly, but it's not permanent and if you had help you could cart it out to the garden and use it as a planter :)

The light fixture looks too fussy for me, contrary to the designer's own statement--it is large, but it registers as "chatty" rather than quiet, because of all the movement and ornamentation to it.

The light fixture Allison posted right above--shudders. I guess I just don't have the "Hey, look at my really large light fixture" gene.

I think the architecture of the home is stunning. Unfortunately, I cannot even appreciate the bones of the house because all that "stuff" cluttering it up is distracting like you said Annie. For instance that ginormous pitcher draws attention away from those 3 gorgeous windows above the sink. Instead of hiring that decorator, I would have ripped out all the carpets and put in new hardwood floors.

(Btw, I cracked up at comment about kids wadding up paper and playing basketball into the chandy basket. My two sons and daughter would have done the same thing! I would find the trash bucket in their rooms overflowing sometimes!)

Those two chandeliers are in a close race for the most awful ones I've ever seen. The one in the designer's home could easily kill several people.

I liked most of it-pitcher and all, BUT I can't figure out the living room-it seems scattered and I don't like the way the couch and the sofa table behind it "fit" (or rather, doesn't "fit") together, among other things in the living room. Everything seems to "curvy"? Love the house though.

I just took a second peak at this very lovely home. I was hoping to actually read though the article, so I could learn and understand. I cannot seem to access it. Grrrr!

Anyways, I did read the small excerpts. It said this was designed for a young couple. Is that right? I'm so curious...did they end up having any children? Any pets?

All I could think of was PBnJ fingers being "accidentally" wiped on those those enormous off white curtains everywhere. You think they are washable?Just imagine taking those down and bringing them to the dry cleaners! Spot cleaning can only do so much.

Pets? Oh no. I just imagined a game of tug-o-war with them. Oh and the first time puppy lifted its' leg or chewed a hole....it would no doubt be banished to the back forty or brought to the puppy pound on the spot. That actually happened to me, so don't think it wouldn't happen. I came home from kindergarden one day, so excited to see my new puppy that we had for a couple weeks. Miss Ginger was gone. I was told my 2 year old younger brother had stepped in a turd and tracked it all over the carpets. No more Ginger. It must have been traumatic to me, cuz I still remember that like it was yesterday after 40 years! :-(

I hated visiting my one grandma's house because the moment us grandkids stepped in, all we heard from my mom and Aunts was, "Don't touch anything!"

Not kid friendly....just sayin'. Okay sorry for the rant and TMI. I think I need to stay in the kitchen forum. Haha!

Olliesmom, I'd like to see the wall (windows?) where the photographer is standing in the LR. While I understand having two seating areas in a large LR can be nice/functional (my parents have two), this LR appears to be too small, so cannot pull it off. The photo makes it looks like a jumble of furniture. It's not cohesive. If someone can find out what month/year it was featured, I probably have the magazine. I keep most of the Veranda issues.

I don't like that statement pitcher, or the statement chandy. I also don't like the layered coffee tables. That trunk is unusable where it sits and it deserves a spot of its own.

Allison, I see what you mean. Looking at it again, I think the furniture in the house is too small compared to the huge beams, chandy, etc.-just the big and openness of the house-I feel it needs more substantial-sized furniture to to go with the architecture of the house. To me, the furniture looks too jumbled and skinny for the space.

I would think it would be hard to pull off the "baby blue" and cream/white without having a color to "ground" it in a house with huge features like that, unless you have more massive furniture. I don't like the baby blue lampshades either.