It’s fine as long as they’re reasonable. I don’t want random people in my neighborhood to pain their house pink with yellow flowers either.
People use "neighbors paint their house pink" as some sort of canonical example here, but I've lived in neighborhoods with pink houses and ugly houses and unkempt lawns and so-over-the-top-it-borders-on-creepy Christmas decorations and it has never bothered me enough to care.
Why does it actually bother you?
It's an expensive durable good, policy should be focused on making it cheaper over time.
(while maintaining or increasing suitability/utility, not by letting it decay)
In terms of policy I totally agree, but as an individual, nothing has done more for my personal wealth than my real estate transactions. Of course, a lot of that is my location, but in general, real estate (much like stock) goes up.
My argument is that treating housing as an investment drives costs up over time and that at a policy level we should not seek to do that, we should seek to lower the cost of housing (while maintaining quality and so on).
Depends entirely on what the particularly awe inspiring monstrosity is.
Obviously I don’t have any issues with it in a practical sense. It’s just the difference between hanging a nice oil painting and the latest abstract fetish. Some people love it, and others do not.
If it’s on the outside of the house everyone has to enjoy it regardless of whether they want to do so.
While I’m mostly on the side of letting someone do what they want, I think there is a limit.