wowed, I agree with your response, and it's interesting to me. I would want at least sound, if not visual, separation, between a lavatory/dressing area and a bedroom. It's interesting to compare the bedroom/lavatory area/toilet and bath area layers to a palace set up: the anteroom, the throne room (no pun intended) and then private quarters. In the same way, access and function are layered. I think most users would agree this sort of layering is a good thing. Contrast this to the evolution of design of the kitchen/dining/family room area of a house. For me, sound separation of activities (eg., tv watching vs. a conversation in a dining room, or relaxing in the family room without the din of dish stacking) or visual separation (chatting with guests in the dining room while not worrying about how the busy food prep area looks) or even olfactory separation (reading a book in the family room while onions are sliced and sauteed in the kitchen). The grand, open flowing floorplan for these areas is popular, but for me, I prefer a little segregation, especially as the number of users and potential simultaneous uses goes up. Seems to me, as the average household size has shrunk and more people are living in a house of only 2 or 3 people, sure, the open floor plan can work. But for now at least, I want a little bit of separation of activities, and I like my "antiquated" floor plan, with separate kitchen, dining room, family room (tv) and living room (piano). A tv and piano in the same room would be a nuisance for us. So I guess on a more micro level, I'm looking to separate activities in the bathroom. But I agree, if in the process of pulling them apart and relocating them, I mix grooming and sleeping, well, yes, that would be a disastrous unintended consequence! responding to another post, I don't know why that link didn't work, here is the direct url: http://www.farrow-ball.com/Company/FBStyles.aspx?language=en-GB&style=5

Jmc01, I don't have the exact dimension of the room at the moment, but when measured we are able to fit a single 42" or 36" vanity. I would prefer the 42" because I want to get as much storage as possible. The layout of my home is very unique and different from most 1900s homes, we do not know the exact year it was built, but have a photograph of our home dated 1903 and there were only 3 other homes on the entire street and a horse and buggy in front of the house. The current bathroom is not original and was updated in the early 1950s. I would've been content with my vintage bathroom but a major shower leak made us rip out the tile to dry out the rotted sub floor and we now have to start over. Rockybird, I looked at the vanities on RH but couldn't find exactly what I wanted there. DH and I are now looking into a custom cabinet, even though it was not the route we wanted to take, it is the only way we are guaranteed solid wood construction. We have 3 children and this is our main bathroom and it needs to hold up. I'm worried about MDF getting wet and warping with 3 kids brushing teeth or doing lord knows what in there. I once found my 10 year old giving our daschund a bath in the bathroom sink-lol, so I need durability.

Update: We went to PB to find out more info — after talking with the “designer” there we realized the Burnett couch was not deep enough for what we were looking for — we walked out of there 95% sure we were going to order the PB Pearce sectional. After going home and doing more research online I just couldn’t justify the price of a PB couch with all of the negative reviews about both the cushions and the fabric. We ended up going with the Bassett Beckham sectional — going into a Bassett store was a whole other experience — super knowledgeable and you can tell the quality is far superior to PB for a similar price point and they offer a guarantee where PB does not. That being said, if we had a smaller room that the Burnett was perfect for it might be with a try.

I had an older Pottery Barn faucet in a former house and it held up just as well as the Moens and Kohlers I also had. At the time it was the only widespread bridge faucet I could find to fit a vintage sink -- I only had it for two years before selling the house, so can't vouch for longevity, but it felt and functioned very similarly to the other brands and I loved the styling. Had decent heft and since it wasn't in a drinking location we weren't too concerned with following up on manufacture to check the lead content. You might also try Kingston Brass and Newport Brass? Not sure if still true but back then I recall reading one of those was manufacturing Pottery Barn's faucets.