For small kids, I wouldn't want the echo effect of the look over in the first one. I think overall, I like the second one but would you have to put two boys in a room upstairs? Would that be a problem? Are they close in age? I also like the bonus room in the second one.

I also just notice how you walk right into the kitchen from the garage on the first one. I'd like at least a little landing area for all your "stuff". The laundry right next to the dining room is also a bummer. Okay, that settles it..house plan #2!!!!

I agree, I like the 2d one better. I would not want to walk in from the garage directly into the kitchen. Also, the trip from the kitchen to the dining room is long and means crossing right by the laundry. And I like the fact that the guest room is away from the master.

I also dislike how the garage traffic comes through the kitchen in plan 1 and the smaller laundry area. There'd be a lot of dripping across the floor from the laundry sink to the washer. The dining room is quite a trek from the kitchen, too.

The 2nd one is better, but I'm concerned about distance for the boys to find you in the night if you intended to keep them downstairs for awhile. I think in this plan, they'll be closer upstairs. I love the better sized kitchen, keeping and breakfast rooms. The kitchen plan is really pretty decent for a stock plan. Usually they're not well thought out and need some re-working. The laundry setup is much better. I love the study loft already planned in. There is no guest closet, though. I'm not crazy about going through the master bathroom to access the closet, but they both do that. I like the separated closets in the 2nd one.

I'm with lindybarts...Plan 2 is the clear winner in this race for me.

The second one has a better dining/kitchen/garage entry relationship but I would get the fireplace off the outside wall (try your furniture in the space and pay attention to the traffic through it) and redesign the multi-faceted "serving bar". Diagonal views through the house are usually a very good thing for modern life styles but having your kids (as dear as they no doubt are) perched in the middle of the major one is a really bad idea IMHO. Or maybe I just don't like awkward shapes like high counters taking two partial turns in view of all the living spaces as if it were the main feature of the house. IMHO this idea should be retired permanently. I'm sure that will offend someone but you asked for opinions.

Of course, it is impossible for us to really advise you about what plan is best for your family and life style since we don't know much if anything about you or your family. Be careful about "polling ignorance" as my father used to say. Make sure someone has adequate information to have a worthwhile opinion before asking an important question. People just don't say "I don't know" often enough anymore.

It almost seems like a runaway win for #2, huh? I originally really liked #2, but upon further searching, came across the other plan. So I wanted some outside opinions, thus my OP.

lindybarts, you're probably right about that echo-effect, although I have a feeling that the Devon Park also has an overlook of sorts there as well. And, yes, two of the boys (arriving in April!) are twins! So they'll be sharing a room until they decide otherwise, at which point we'll convert the bonus to a third bedroom.

You all had a good point about the kitchen / dining / laundy relationship. I hadn't even considered that until you all brought it up. Although I did notice the garage entry into the kitchen and wasn't real thrilled about that either.

anvil, interesting and well thought out opinion on the 'serving bar' design. I'll have to give that some thought. And you are certainly right about polling for opinions like I'm doing here, but I am only trying to pick your brains and get ideas that I haven't thought of (like the kitchen / dining / laundry thing). I am an information junky, so I'll take all I can get. Also, I don't know if there is a way to track 'post views' on this forum. But there are no doubt many (some?) that viewed and didn't post. Those are the "I don't knows"

A couple of other considerations; I now notice from looking at the rear elevations (not shown here) that #1 has a '2-story' family room with windows all the way up in the back. #2 has a 'vaulted' family room, but only 1 level of windows on the back. Our lot is very wooded, we're in zone 7 (I believe). Any opinions about the difference here?

Also, I originally said that the plans are similar in sq. ft., but in reality, they are about 400 (finished - assuming the bonus room will be finished in the Devon Park plan) sq. ft. different, with plan #2 (Devon Park) being larger. I am shooting for a building cost of around $100/foot (may even owner build) not including the lot. By looking at these plans, is it valid to say that the Devon Park would cost about $40K more to build? I think not, mainly due to the more complex framing and roofing structure of the Prescott Ridge plan (see the images below). Is my thinking correct here?

Prescott Ridge
{{gwi:1405630}}

Devon Park
{{gwi:1405631}}

To me, the Prescott looks more expensive to frame than the Devon.

Thanks to all, please keep the ideas coming.

I'm far from an expert, but not all square footage is created equal, so it's not safe to assume a house that's 400 sq ft larger will cost $40K more. You are right that complexity of footprint and framing, room heights, number, size, and types of windows, more or less bathrooms, your own choices of fixtures and materials, etc., etc. can all make a difference in cost. There are too many variables to be able to rely on square footage generalizations.

Hi

Now that you posted the elevations, I really like number 2 better. I always think if you plopped down blindfolded in the middle of some subdivision then removed the blindfold, which houses would I be able to remember? Number 1 is very similar to many other homes, number 2 is distinctive - I would remember it. I think that is really important- at least to me. A really nice house can just blend right in if it's too similar to everything else around it.

As for floorplans- the second plan has vital "back hall" space you are going to need. I would do whatever it takes to get a half bath in that back hall space area. I always imagine coming in with muddy/wet feet- how far to get to a bathroom/sink. In both plans, it's through most of the major living areas of the home. With plan 2 - you could possibly move the bedroom/study towards the keeping room- move the bathroom to the other side near the laundry - then have a door into that bathroom from the bedroom/study and the laundry. That also eliminates having a bathroom door that opens directly into a major living area which frankly "stinks". Pun intended. LOL

PD

I have never liked the multi-layered gable design motif of the first one; at best it looks contrived and not authentic to me and it has become the dominant cliche in the Plans For Sale market. Gables can be very nice but not when stuck on like cake decoration.

The second one is much stronger as a design but the little stuttering dormers seem overdone IMHO. As a practical matter, why would anyone put so many dormers so close together? The space between them would have to be all copper north of the Mason-Dixon line. Does it seem strange to anyone to find multiple shed type wall dormers on a Colonial Revival house next to such a prominent pediment?

I'm with ponydoc and mightyanvil. Neither plan has a good enough 'back hall' -- gotta have a toilet there! I stopped looking at both plans when I saw that was missing.

The Betz designs frequently seem tight on useable interior space and have overly 'frilly' exteriors -- an absence or incompatible mix of style that my late aunt would call 'Fatherless French'. (Absolutely replace those three shed dormers with one on the Devon Park. I dislike the archtop entry door on this farmhouse style, too.)

This is a tough one, me personally..I like the elevation of the prescott ridge, but the floor plan of the devon park. They both are nice though, I know it is tough to find the right plan. We are going with a frank betz plan called the panola, at first we were going to go with the copeland but our builder told us it would cost more to do a master on the main, so we went with the panola. Plus my kids are young and I was a little worried about them getting up in the middle of the night and coming down the stairs, because they still try and get in our bed. So i feel this works better for us, but i did like the elevation on the copeland better, but you cant have it all:) Good luck with picking out the right plan for you!!

Diana

Betz began his design practice providing house designs to developers and I believe that is still his focus. If you want a house with generous spaces and all the elements in the right places I think you should be looking at another designer's plans or looking for an architect.

What's your lot like? Where's the sun? Where will the driveway go? Think about what it is you like about these plans and keep them in mind when you go to the lot. What will you see when you're standing on your deck? On the porch?

Hmm...

I personally like the layout of #2 better. I like the larger master suite and the entry close to the laundry room. However, you say you are having twins soon, and I don't know how much you'd like to trek across the house or up the floor to tend to them in the middle of the night (I have a 10 1/2 month old who just started sleeping through the night recently). #1 has a bedroom fairly close to the master but I really don't like the entry from garage into the kitchen. Perhaps a plan with a "mudroom" entry but with a bedroom closer to the master?