You should show all sides of the house.

What are the requirements? Are you required to have masonry on the front of the house? Gigantic blank front facing garage doors? (just kidding)

I don't have the other elevations yet. I'll get those and post them on Wednesday, although I was hoping to make a decision about some of these things by the time I meet with them. Essentially, the other sides are just straight walls, no bumpouts or anything, but I understand why I need to show them.

The requirements are 50% stone, brick, or EIFs on the front elevation of the house. 6:12 min. roof. Attached, min. 2 car garage. Those are the only covenants relevant to the elevation.

Hah, yes, the garage doors. Mine, at least, won't be blank I'm sure we'll have high windows in it. And maybe we can see about doing two doors. But as I've mentioned previously, that is a priority to us--the front driveway is living space for us, that we want easily visible from the porch, and we are willing to compromise on the look of the house for it. Plus, we are flipping the house so the garage will be on the opposite side of the approach, and it will be set back 18" from the frot of the house.

This post was edited by CamG on Sat, Dec 8, 12 at 17:58

We like the craftsman look also and tried to incorporate some of the features into our design. We have a bathroom in the middle of the second floor but we made a little "playroom" running along that wall about 4 ft. wide and then put the gable at the bedroom at the left side of the elevation. Our house foundation is a rectangle, but the porch bumps out and the garage is back a little bit. Our earlier designs looked similar to your elevation above, we designed from the inside out and then added interest through the gables and the bump out on the garage. We wanted a simple shell design that would make the framing economical and I believe we accomplished that based on the framing bids we've received.

Hopefully I have something helpful to offer :)

Sketch is great, and would look even better if the garage was set back behind the front elevation of the house, 1'-0 or as much more as possible. Setting it back helps to reduce the visual bulk of the garage and huge (in comparison to the rest of the house) doors. Using two single doors, rather than one double door, is an added help, particularly if the doors are detailed interestingly as shown. Good luck!

Very nice Renovator!

CamG, you are already leaps and bounds ahead of your neighbors who have absolutely aweful front elevations dominated by front loading 3 car garages.

Will you be the only 2 story home in the area?

I like the 6 over 1 windows in the sketch. Any I agree if you can put in 2 separate garage doors and make them nice!

Renovator, I really like that, and thank you very much for putting in the time do draft that. If I'm not mistaken, it looks fairly similar to a house in a nearby neighborhood:

I think to make your design work, we'd have to have the shed dormer coming off the back of the house, too. Maybe that's good, as it would add a bit of interest to the back of the house--the approach from the main street will actually be to the back of the house, so that's not a bad idea. Also, I don't think the garage roof could be a continuation of the porch roof if we set the garage back from the house, as that would leave a 6 or 7' overhang in front of the garage.

I definitely see how that looks much more interesting than the designs I suggested previously, although it adds quite a bit of expense and complication to the roof, doesn't it? We'll have to think about that.

Virgil, we will see about doing double doors, and I certainly understand the improved look from it, but there is additional cost (and really, it makes it harder pulling in and out of the garage). That money might be better spent getting a more detailed garage door.

pps7, we won't be the ONLY 2-story in the neighborhood, but close. A block down is a circle with a few 2-story houses, including the one below (which is probably my favorite house in our neighborhood).

We love this neighborhood for its location, its proximity to a new Church and relatives, and we love our lot size (and price), and it's hard to find a lot around here that isn't tied to some builder we don't want. There are only two neighborhoods in our town that don't generally have the garage in front of the house, and they are very neat to be sure (the craftsman that is similar to Renovator's sketch comes from one). But those neighborhoods all require rear or side-facing garages, which combined with narrow lots, means you never get a good-sized backyard. While I understand the goal of these neighborhoods--we live behind privacy fences too much, and we should spend more time out front on porches and the like conversing with neighbors--having a decent backyard is also important to us (and our dogs).

This post was edited by CamG on Sun, Dec 9, 12 at 11:29

We have a front facing garage bc our lot is long but narrow so I get the need for one. If you are on a corner lot, then can you do a side entry garage?

CamG, the photo you show has a center front facing gable with shed dormers on each side. My sketch has two front facing gables with a shed dormer between them. If this is repeated on the back side you get two full stories that doesn't look like a box.

I thought he garage was forward enough for it's roof to be an extension of the porch roof. In your neighborhood I can't see a reason to worry about a prominent front facing garage; it seems more important to me to make the massing of the main house have some character. I hate to say this but I've never seen a collection of houses with less architectural character.

When it comes to garage doors, there's always a couple of options:

--A single door for a double-wide garage;
--Two single-car wide doors for a double-wide garage.

As far as parking the car (entering or leaving) it's as easy for one as the other. One could build a case that either is more convenient than the other, but it's really just personal preference. If one can park a car in a stall in a parking lot or parking garage, one can park a car with single-wide garage doors.

The real challenge to overcome with garages is one of scale. A double-wide garage door is easily the single largest component on the exterior of a residential building and no amount of detailing, glazing and color will hide the fact that it dwarfs every other element of a residence. Garage doors simple dominate the elevation of a house where they are located.

That's why it may be a good idea to put the garage out back, use a side loading garage or any other alternative to keep the garage doors from being visible from the front of the house and/or the main approach for visitors and guests.

Of course, in many modern suburban (and some urban) subdivisions this isn't possible. So the next best thing from an aesthetic point of view is to take as many design steps as are prudent and affordable to break down the scale of the garage and garage doors, i.e., two smaller doors instead of one large one; nicely detailed, patterned doors or doors with siding to match the siding of the house; glazing similar to the rest of the house will help reduce the scale of each door; paint colors to blend the door into its wall plane instead of making the doors jump out in contrast to the wall material and color, etc.

Of course, all of this presupposes that one cares about how their house looks and appreciates the rest of the house more than the garage.

Just some thoughts...

Just my two cents...but while these extras are nice, aren't they also more expensive?

Do you like farmhouse style? I think the more simple design details would look really nice and you could still incorporate the mandatory stone accents. All the houses in your picture look very similar...and I guess I'd want to be as different as possible, within your restrictions. That's why I like the idea of a green house or maybe white with green trim and a bright red front door. Not more gray/beige.

Now, I know I'm a bit porch-happy (LOL) but I'd take any extra money and make the front porch 8' deep (room enough for chairs or a glider) and have entry/access from the front and off to the side for the garage/driveway. Why have a porch, if you can't sit out and enjoy it? :)

LL, those were my thoughts exactly. I was really hoping to minimize expensive roof details, bumpouts, etc. Now, I also don't want to stick out like a sore thumb, or build an ugly house.

If I were building off by myself, or isolated from others, I would definitely build a simple farmhouse, like below:

{{gwi:1517485}}

My hesitation is that I would stick out even more than I will already by having a two story. Frankly, I would rather spend the money on a wrap around porch than bumpouts and roof details. Maybe that's what I need to break up the boxiness?

As a side question, do I really need 8'? If I did farmhouse and substituted skinny columns for the big tapered columns with bases, that would save a lot of space (and cost) too.

CamB, the picture of the "farmhouse" you posted is a very handsome, simple and well-proportioned house that is a simple rectangluar form, with a perpendicular addition to the rear. It only has a few materials and a simple porch and roof form.

One of the very important reasons this house appears to pleasing and well-proportioned is that it's just three bays wide by one room deep. Look at the windows on the front: three windows--an entry with a single room to the left and right. Look at the window on the side: one window--one room.

The challenge with most builder's plans is that they are almost as deep (two or more rooms deep) as they are wide (numerous rooms wide). These sorts of house plans are inherently bulky, ill-proportioned and over inflated. The desire for huge laundry rooms and cubbies for battalion; a house with a living room, a family room , and a keeping room with seperate dining and breakfast rooms, plus office or study; huge master bedroom and dressing/closets that, together, are bigger than any other single or pair of rooms in the house, etc., all make for unbelivable over-inflated houses! And have I mentioned the mandatory triple car garages for all the "toys" that the adults have?

These sorts of houses are then tarted up with an unbelivable combination of materials, and with huge and bulky roofs which are required to enclose the massive floor plans.

The only opportunity for a house such as you have pictured is to seriously re-assess what's truly essential for one's house, and to seperate the needs from the wants with discipline.

Designing one's house to match the neighborhood houses (or for the resale market) is probably the worst strategy(s) one could follow. It will result in a house built for the neighbors, not for the occupant's true needs. And it certainly will never achieve a simple and attractive house such as the one in your photograph.

Look around and look at books--some of the most beautiful and appealing houses, that stand the test of time, are often some of the simplest houses. Sometimes, less is really more!

Just some thoughts from the wilderness...

IMO the only thing reminiscent of the Craftsman Style in any of the photos or drawings so far posted is the ubiquitous stone base of tapered porch columns which look lonely and out of place on these strange neo-eclectic houses.

The house I sketched is mostly influenced by the Colonial Revival Style and/or the Shingle Style. Even the so-called "farmhouse" example is primarily a Colonial Adam/Federal Style house with a Victorian porch added.

Here is a in-town high-style version of a Federal Style house built in 1806 in Kennebunkport, Maine.

Whatever you call this style house I agree that it would not sit well in your neighborhood.

To design a house that is less neo-eclectic but still fits in the neighborhood will take considerable design work. Since stone is required I would make the lower story all stone and the upper story all shingles with a belt-line shingle flare over a crown molding. Essentially I would try to tie the house into the neighborhood with materials but shoot for more elegant detailing. So, I believe the elements to avoid are pseudo "Craftsman" porch posts, interlocking hipped roofs, and hidden front doors.

The point of the house I sketched is to demonstrate a cheap way of turning a 2 story box into a 1 1/2 story house by adding two cross-gable roof shapes with the last couple of feet of the main roof at each end dropped in slope to mimic a 1 1/2 story design. Otherwise you are stuck with a four-square/prairie/Federal style house in neo-eclectic paradise which is a good way to get a new nickname.

I don't know your area, but my current neighborhood has both houses that strongly resemble the one-story homes in your neighborhood and farmhouse style homes. There is more variation from home to home in our neighborhood than what you show in your pictures, but I think you could do either the plan from the drafter or Renovator's plan and not stick out too much (Renovator's plan is nicer, but I don't know if you have the budget for it). Especially if your landscaping and color choices are in line with the rest of the neighborhood (your neighbors will be landscaping, right?)

Personally, I am avoiding the gable-within-a-gable look. I only see them on houses built in the last 5-10 years, and I think they will look very dated very soon.

FWIW, if you did a really classic looking farmhouse, you might end up looking like the house that was there first (before the land was sold to developers), which could be nice...

I like the "original homestead" idea. I often develop a "myth" for a house design; it often adds some consistency to the multitude of design decisions.

Cam- Do you want to have any furniture on the porch? If so, then 8' is probably as narrow as you want to go and still walk past it, when people are seated. If you're not going to have furniture and just want a bench or two, then 6' might be deep enough. I'd mock up what you want and then determine how much space you need, considering the posts and railings on the porch.

As long as you meet the requirements for your development, I'd want my house to be what makes me happy and I think a farmhouse (with a porch) would appeal to most everyone...so resale would not be a problem. In fact, if you go for it, I think other new builds might start copying your home! :)

When it comes to porches, houses with porches seem to always be more "romantic" and appealing, with the possible exception of "International Style" houses which have their own aesthetic and appeal (for some, including me).

That said, I wonder how many people would really regularly use their front porch, in view of the rest of the neighborhood? In my experience, it's usually the back porch, with greater privacy for the family, that is the one that is used with greatest frequency.

Then there's the issue of getting natural light into the house, which generally precludes a roofed porch of greater depth than around 4-6' in the U.S. This depth prevents summer sun from entering the house, but allows winter sun to do so. This suggests the combination of a 6'-8' rear porch, combined with a larger, landscape patio where bar-b-que, table and chairs may be placed. If hot summer sun is an issue, then the inclusion of a strategically designed and placed pergola or trellis (perhaps with climbing vines) will shade seating areas on the patio.

A porch/roof designed for passive solar usage, combined with a landscaped patio, makes for a visually appealing and functional back of the house, where family and friends can gather while still letting natural light into the house.

Just a thought!

I really appreciate all of the thoughts above. Please know that I'm not ignoring the great advice I've received, but rather trying to work within our budget to produce a house that appeals to us. It is clear that a coherent architectural style would make this house stand out even more or would require very significant changes to the house. We're happy where the porch is, though we realize it is not ideal for solar and other aspects. We may revisit its depth, but we were planning on a place to sit (and a porch swing), rather than to gather around, and I think it's clearly deep enough for one row of chairs.

The drafters sent me the latest rendering. This was not based on any feedback of mine except to flip the house so the approach from the street is towards the side of the house rather than the garage. The colors of the siding and stone are not correct, we were thinking maybe a dark grey. This was the only view I've received electronically, as the elevations and plans were given to me on large scale paper.

Frankly, my wife and I are pretty happy with this. The architect who is overseeing the drafters has visited the neighborhood, and we are all fairly comfortable that the house won't stick out too terribly, as the stone and the multiple gable ends help tie it in with the rest of the houses.

Now, as we're learning towards just going with this rather than significantly redesigning the exterior, are there any particular ways to improve what we have here? Ren8, you mentioned avoiding bulky tapered columns--would regular square, non-tapered columns work better here? Any other ideas? I know we are missing a visible beam underneath the porch roof above the columns, but I'll take that up with the builder to see what that entails. Thoughts? Thanks again.

Do you have more views of the 3D model? Are there elevation drawings?

For a porch this narrow I would want to reduce the bulk of the posts by eliminating the masonry bases. Square columns whether tapered or not would be more appropriate IMO.

If you are trying to save money why put a "ghost" gable behind the cross gable? That seems like the only developer cliche not used on the neighboring houses so it doesn't seem like a good "tie in" to me.

I don't mean to insult anyone but is there really an architect overseeing the design? Maybe it's just the crudeness of the 3D model but the house looks like a preliminary design rather than a final one.

If stone masonry is going to be used, would it make any sense to use stone masonry to finish the sides of the concrete porch, rather than have exposed concrete, as shown? Makes the porch look like an afterthought!

And why use stone for the lower 6" or so of exposed foundation along the side? Surely this is just a CAD glitch?

I agree with removing the unnecessary second roof gable, unless there's habitable space and an unseen window there. I think these double-gabled thingeys went out with the 1970 national home builder's convention, but they still hang around.

Windows on side appear not to be aligned. I'd use taller windows on the first floor (always taller than second floor windows) to improve the house proportions and let in more natural light. Will the front porch really be used?

Otherwise, looks to me like a simple house to frame and build, and one that will blend into any neighborhood. Should be a good house in which to live. Congratulations!

Ren8, I think I agree about the columns. Eliminating the masonry base would surely save a lot of cost, and save space on the porch.

The arrangement with the drafters is that two students are doing it with oversight from their teacher. I never expected this to be an extremely polished product, particularly when much of their time has been spent modifying the plans according to my constantly changing requests!

The "ghost" gable... hmm. While I agree you don't see that immediately around our house, it is present in the neighborhood (notice the dark grey house I posted above). Generally I agree and abhor elements just for show, but I feel like it helps the house blend in better and breaks up an otherwise large, uncomplicated roof (something that is not found in our neighborhood). I may have to have this deleted and see how it looks.

Virgil,
Yes, the stone along the foundation must be a glitch.

That's a good idea to put stone on the front of the porch. Do I need to put it on the side of the porch as well?

We will make the windows taller on the first floor (by having them 18" or so off the floor). We do intend on using the front porch.

Regarding the windows on the side: they are not lined up together, nor are they centered on the outside wall--that's because they are arranged in the interior rooms as we would want them (upstairs the windows will flank the master bed). Will that look strange? I'm not sure how to arrange the windows on the side of the house, since they will be relatively small and if we distribute them evenly along the exterior wall they will be in strange places relative to the rooms inside.

CamG, if it were me, and I had stone on the front elevation, I'd add it to the front and side of the porch to be consistent. This will take some dimensional coordination for the foundation's masonry ledge in order to have the depth of the stone be flush with the exposed foundation wall on each side elevation.

Arrangement of windows, particularly on a symmetrical house mass, is always challenging. From the exterior, one expects some symmetry for the windows, echoing the symmetry of the exterior building form. From the interior, the windows want to be where they best facilitate the interior furniture and functions. Windows flanking the bed in a bedroom always looks good from the inside, IMO.

This is where compromise comes in and you have to be the deciding vote. I'd suggest aligning the windows as best you can, while still achieving some of your goals for the interior.

Good luck on your project.

How's this?

Regarding the stone on the front of the porch, I think we will be planting bushes to cover all of that, so it seems a little silly to put expensive stones where they won't be seen? I'm also not sure at this point how tall the porch will be, so we can reassess if it is several feet tall.

Is there an issue with the columns vulnerable to water damage sitting on the concrete? I suppose we would probably do 6x6 treated posts with fiberglass or the like columns?

That's a much more visually pleasing plan. Ideally, the stone should wrap around the side of the house to the right at the single story line with siding above it like it is on the front.

I think I might take it one step further and eliminate the gable at the porch. It's obviously not there for any functional reason, and you'd have the perfect simple farmhouse look without it.

Live_wire, interesting idea. Like this? Excuse the poor photoshop job...

If you change the tapered porch column to 4X4 or 6X6 (and I'd suggest 45-degree "knee" braces if you are looking for a farm house aesthetic), then the columns should be treated lumber and sit on anchored post bases to keep them above the surface of the concrete slab.

Treated lumber will have a much longer life-span, but elevating them slightly above the concrete slab will ensure their longevity.

If you think the slight elevation is unsightly, they can always be trimmed out with a treated lumber base.

I like this, but I would put stone across the front. I know you plan on bushes, but they aren't instantaneous or forever, and so having stone there makes it look finished, imo.

CamG, I really like he latest rendition with only one gable. I agree with using taller windows. Will you have divided lites?

I think this is similar to what virgilcarter is suggesting:

We used 8x8 . The columns were slightly off the ground so we put in trim pieces. I would reconsider the stone on the front of the porch. I didn't realize this needed to be specified in advance. We didn't have a brick or stone ledge so it was too late by the time I decided to put stone. Maybe just put in the stone ledge just in case you change your mind.

Hmmm.. We had resigned ourselves to our neighborhood's pseudo craftsman look, not a farmhouse, but I'm intrigued by the knee brace ideas. I would prefer knee brace decorations on the pillars to unnecessary gable ends, but I think we need something like this. My wife is voting on the second to last picture with the portico gable, saying the latest version looks a bit plain for our neighborhood. And while you guys may be very smart and some of you are professionals, my wife is always right :)

Cam- When you say you've 'resigned' yourselves...does that mean you really want a farmhouse? I thought you liked both styles, but if you'd rather have the farmhouse, then why not? It's your house and you'll be there for a very long time.

I like that last picture! The wood posts (and the door!) look more 'fairy tale' to me...which is my favorite style :)

We loved the first photo and used it as our inspiration!! Our house should be complete next month. Thank you!

Sarahprice, I'm glad to hear someone got some use out of that photo I found! I like your house even better, though. Your windows have exactly the same muntins as we will, and I think we are doing a very similar color of siding. What type/color is the siding? Please post more photos as you finish!