I love the addition but,,,,,,,,,,, it doesn't match the rest of house. You asked " If I put in a fake roof where the ladder is standing, would that tie the two together? " The answer is yes but that might not be possible due to existing measurments and load bearing ability of existing structure. If a roof can be added it would serve an important function. I can't imagine anything worse for leaks than blinding the roof into a wall like that. So bad that I would bet two to one the roof will leak withing 5 years. It will be impossible to permanatly fix and will eventually lead to serious structrual damage. I don't envy your situation as it presently stands but it will only get worse if it's not addressed. I strongly recommend getting local roofing experts involved before another day go's by. Good luck and let us know if disgruntled clients one day decide to lynch that architect.

Considering that this was done by an architect, it's a muddled/confused design. It looks like the roof on the original house dead ends into the side of the new addition. Is there a cricket/saddle/something up there to accommodate roof runoff that I just can't see? Or will rainwater off the roof of the existing house simply puddle against the sidewall of the new addition.

Could be perspective/parallax, but the T-astragal molding on the front double door does not appear to be centered on the window above it. The left and right returns at the base of the semicircle cutout over the door do not appear to be symmetrical/centered either, the left return appears smaller than the right.

I'd start by attacking the negative space outlined in red, to me that's the low cost solution. The simple overlay will not require any structural changes to your existing house.

If roof drainage is indeed an issue, filing in the above will take care of the water. It'll also fill in the negative space and blend the two together. Slightly blend the two together.

If you can go beyond that budget-wise, I'd change the windows on your existing gable end wall to better match the addition. If you can go even beyond that, I'd change the old roofline even more.

Good luck.

I am so sorry your undoubtably expensive addition is not looking like you had hoped. I agree that changing the roofline between the old and new would go far in improving the disconnect. As will cohesive windows and siding. Here is a split addition that has better roof lines, I like the flat vs arches when going more modern, but it is the windows and siding too that make it work better than what you have now.

I also wonder if highlighting the more modern addition with modern siding through out might help make since of the disconnect.

The roof lines are the greatest flaw in your addition I am not sure if it is feasible structurally or economically to change the orginal, either with a bridge like in mongo's rendering or I think even a flatter roof in front of the orginal structure would look much better than it is now.

good luck.

I am sorry that you didn't voice your concerns earlier. I could not live with that and would have it ripped off before any more funds were spent on it.

In case budget is a big concern here is your house with just a window change it is already less awkward

i finished a small addition to add needed function in my house, a master bathroom. The only affordable option I had was to change my curb appeal and to be honest my house was cuter from the street before the addition. I should have put the same size windows above the first floor window to have had it perfect from the curb but the privacy and logistical solution of an awning window trumped the small curb appeal I lost and now a few months later I am glad I did it but when it was first finished I cried! You started the process to gain something and often inorder to gain one thing we sacrifice another. You can make this work I believe.

Fire your guy and hire roarah right away!

The more I look at the mock ups the more I think it might be best to leave orginal roof line. The Addition's center roof pitch mimics the orginal and maybe just remove the grill and add the little side pieces to the triangle like in the addition's center.

Roarah thank you for taking the time to help me out here. Thank you everybody else who gave meaningful comments to get me thinking.( Except the person who said yikes) roarah I like your last picture with side pieces. Specially because it'll much much cheaper to do. I will talk to our builder. We can't do the Windows the way you have them. There are two bedrooms in that old area. Have to be 2 sets of Windows.

Also, another idea. If we add a small patio area with wood fencing to the front of the existing side of the house (where the ladder is right now) would that bring the existing unit to the front and it won't look so far away? Maybe that could tie things together? What do you think?

Since the house is L shaped, that side looks so far away. Maybe filling that empty space between the L will help?

Here's a picture from the side

I am out now but when i get home i can paste the right windows for you and work on side ideas. Chin up it will turn out fine.

You are the best! :)

MongoCT The left and right returns at the base of the semicircle cutout over the
door do not appear to be symmetrical/centered either, the left return
appears smaller than the right.

Good eye! (But short of moving both the door and the window above, you're stuck with that.)

Sorry the "yikes" hurt your feelings. Yikes- a term to show extreme surprise or shock. It was used because that is exactly the way I felt when I saw the pictures. Hope you get it sorted out to your satisfaction.

Susu, I am having a hard time juxtaposing a good mock up of the windows on the side view so this is just what you have now with some landscape mocked in and I love your idea of a court yard between the l shape. I do not think it needs a fence just pretty stone work and soft planting. It could serve as a lovely side porch.

My initial thought on the positive was that the roof line of the entry matched the angle of the original part. Always a pet peeve of mine. I like the tricked out roof on the original that @roarah pasted up.

Roarah, can you photoshop off the shutters and photoshop siding from old part to new wing.

That entryway facade is a tear out, in my opinion. Who builds asymmetrically, in a clearly symmetrical design?

Susu, I doubt the yikes! was uttered in malice, and quite frankly, the quality of work by this so called professional is shocking. I hadn't noticed what MongoCT said but it should be redone, it is bad work. You are paying for better work than that. Your job is not to fix it, your job is to DEMAND that guy fixes the work (assuming you didn't instruct him to do it asymmetrically, which I doubt you did). I hope he does right by you in the end.

I agree, tear the 2 story entry portico off and see what is left.

Can you post the elevation plans from your architect? Maybe he had a plan to tie this together?

Sorry life got a bit busy earlier and I forgot to post my very rough mock up with out shutters with a court yard.

I agree that the front entry two story portico looks very odd and is poorly executed. It immediately reminded me of an old country church. Is that the look you were going for?

You could go modern with it by extending the roofline as a shed roof. But only if you alter that off center tower facade. Which needs to be fixed anyway.

What you can't do is ignore the future water damage that the valley will create. Soon.

I cannot believe that an actual architect created this. Maybe a failed student of architecture.

And I also can't believe an experienced builder would build this insurance claim waiting to happen without calling to your attention the inadequacies of the design.

You have been ill served by all.

Rockbird said "Can you post the elevation plans from your architect? Maybe he had a plan to tie this together?" Which started me thinking if the truth was known I suspect the plans are actually some other architect's custom home plans with the right wing erased and slid up against Susu's original house. Or even worse ,the addition was drawn with only appearance in mind with no regard for structural fitness. I believe we can all agree anyone dumb enough to draw up such oddity likely didn't make the structural integrity any better. There's far more at stake than making it look better,that roof to sidewall junction is a disaster waiting to rot the whole thing down.

Klem also addressed this problem.

Unless they're not done with their framing. There's a huge problem at the juncture of the exiting roof line running smack dab into the side of the addition. There's noway to shed water. No amount of water shield or flashing combination will fix this issue.

It needs additional framing to run a reverse gable/cricket/saddle on the existing roof to the side of the addition.

This was an ARCHITECT?

Was this work permitted? The drainage problem at the roof juncture looks concerning.

We changed the single door with transom to double door with no transom.

The work was permitted by the township and they are doing inspections every now and then. Also note There is a down pipe to get the water off the roof/wall.

Also a close up of the roof. This is the in between of new roof and old roof.

Also we talked to the roofing guy about our concerns on the roof. He said 80% of the roof's water will be captured by the gutters of new roof. For the little water from the old roof there's a down pipe and since it's not much roof area it will be fine. We will also bring this up with the township and ask them to pay extra attention to the roof at their next inspection. I'm hoping for the best.

The elevation helps a lot. I see the concern about the roof and the addition looks solved. But I am not a builder, and could be wrong on that point, lol. But it looks like it will shed water.

You need someone with some design taste and a lot of experience to redesign the new/old interface. There isn't a lot that can be done with the new to make it blend with the old, but there is more that can be done with the old to blend with the new. Those new WINDOWS though, ugh, they are so unsuited to the old home. But you're gonna have to bite the bullet and install something similar in the old. With a reworked roof line that doesn't make this look like a bad row house. The good news is that if you fix the roof and connect it more than just a single contact point, you can end up with more usable space. Meshing the roofs means a taller roof for the old. A virtual second story addition.

Would you be willing to sacrifice the neo-Palladian window completely?

Staring at the elevations vs. as built, it appears that the addition is also significantly taller than was planned. The cricket/cross gable is shown at the peak height of the older portion, and intersecting the new at just below the eave line of the tower. Yet, that is off by several feet in the as built. What happened there? A field decision to go with taller ceilings?

Sophie No field decisions for taller ceilings. Everything should be exactly same as the drawings except for the door and no transom. I don't see what you mean by addition is taller. Is it maybe the angle the picture is taken? Take a look at the close up of the roof. It's pretty much the same height.

I immediately thought the same thing as Sophie. I think the builders may be misreading the architect's intentions. The planned roof looks much more pleasing than the built structure.

The new section and the old section tie together exactly as planned in the drawings.

With elevation drawings there is no accounting for perspective, so the receding cross gable roof over the old part of the house that contacts the new portion of the house right under the soffit of that roof is visible on the elevation drawing but invisible from the ground perspective. The roof I drew on my version is the same height as the existing roof on the house, but it looks taller in the elevation drawing.

Side gable roofs will look tall in elevations, shorter in perspective and may disappear altogether to the naked eye looking from the ground.

Likewise the new portion projects, what?, ten feet in front of the old part of the house. In a flat elevation drawing, it is going to look shorter in comparison, in a perspective drawing it gets taller, in person, even more so and with photographic distortion up close get even taller.

In order for this house to look roughly like it does in the elevation drawing we would have to be standing out in the front yard on a scaffolding so our viewpoint was roughly aligned with the second story windows. That's just the nature of elevations.

So, another thing that didn't really get taken into account with this addition is the site. The older part of the house settles into the hill, the new part is a tower built on the hill and the closer you get to it the more the contrast is going to be seen.

But this highlights the difference between old architecture and new architecture. It's very popular to build houses that take complete command of the site, much like a fortress sits on a hill rather than building something seated into the site.

I like green designs idea. Total design fail on their part with the roof terminating into the addition wall. The patch job they tried with the tiny hip put on the gable is not functional and you will have problems.

Also, using that roof idea will help make the house and addition look like they belong together.

It makes me think of Sunny Dell Acres, the house where BO Plenty and Gravel Gertie lived in the Dick Tracy cartoons.. It was the sales office of a development that failed.

Gawd, I hadn't thought of that in decades!!!! JDS, we're dating ourselves!!!

I thought this was a joke.

I think the OP is long gone, and probably primarily wanted reassurance that everything would be okay at the end, and that's not really what s/he got.

I wanted to address something Worthy said, which is that additions can often be radically different than the houses they are attached to. This is a true and valid point but I think that current architectural design forces have tended to invert what happens in ordinary residential architecture.

Throughout the 20th c. to about 1980-85, housing styles tended toward paring down of details, and scale compared to the previous periods. Even different periods of the same general style tended to be simplified versions of the earlier ones.

So a turn of the century colonial revival was fancier than a sesquicentennial colonial revival was fancier than a post WWII colonial revival. So in detail, the new addition tended to be simpler than the main body of the house. And in scale, the same thing: additions tended to be secondary to the main body of the house. So, you'd see, like in Worthy's examples, a simpler box on the back of a more complicated box.

But when houses started getting bigger with a vengeance in the 1980s, and housing styles started getting more and more complex with a vengeance in the 1990s, it became more difficult to add on to an older house without the addition looming over the original. You see it a lot around here.

And I don't think most architecture programs concentrate much on design purity to my knowledge, and even if they do, I am not sure that there is a grade for good taste, I think you are graded primarily on meeting the program requirements of the particular course--that's how my interior design-architecture program was, anyway. Even if there is a strong push toward a particular aesthetic within a program, it's open season once your get your degree and license. My architect friend who doesn't like anything except classical and some neo-classical design, and worked primarily in restoration work was trained in a modernist program.

And really, the architects who make the most money are the ones that will churn out exactly what people want--which for the most part right now is something overwrought with no consistent antecedents. And sorry, I don't agree that whatever the prevailing taste of the culture is, is the good taste of that period. All you have to do is look at the prolonged infatuation with the Kardashians to get that.

A good architect should be able to explain what someone might want isnt the best idea, because it will end up looking odd. I do understand satisfying clients is how they get paid though, when push comes to shove.

However, there are always other ways to get a good end result. I guess I dont know all the requirements of the client, but cmon it doesnt take an architect to see how odd that looks.

I guess if you think of it like abstract art, perhaps abstract housing. (I like neither)

I don't know if anyone is really reading this thread anymore but I am always surprised when there is something questionable on the Building a Home, Remodeling or other threads, and people ask "Did an architect /designer design that?"

The answer is "Sure they did". I think it's a big misapprehension that just because someone has a degree that they are particularly talented. For every profession, those who finish the degree managed to meet the criteria for graduation and possibly for licensure. But within that class there were people who were above average, average and below average, and there are just as many people below the 50th percentile than there are above.

And the individual who designed the above is going to be the least likely person to say to a client "This is why this will not look right" --because to them it probably looks just fine, they designed it.

In this case the OP does not think it looks fine, but most lay people do not know how to look at flat drawings and understand why something like this will not look fine in real life, because most lay people need to see things in three dimensions. And unfortunately, by the time it is three dimensional, it is too late to do anything about it very easily. The architect in this case probably knew exactly what this would look like in three dimensions and does not have a problem with it. Am I that cynical that I think that people really have trouble figuring out what something will look like from a drawing or even a photo? Yes, I think we are losing that ability. I have had two clients not even recognize their own furniture in a photograph when it was not in the context of their own houses. There have been entire books written about how people are losing this ability.

And realistically it does push most of the trend buttons. A towering facade, lots of oversized stacked windows, a reference to the Palladian arch--all the things that people seem to want in new construction. This architect is probably good at plugging in all the popular design elements. Unfortunately, in my opinion, s/he is not good at making something that works well with what is already existing. And quite honestly, I think most clients would probably be quite happy to have an addition that was composed of all the most popular design elements no matter what it looked like in relationship with the old part of the house. If most people did want to achieve complete harmony in the design and decor of their houses over time and in the big picture, we would not see this sort of discordant disconnect all the time, and yet we do see it all the time.

I would immediately stop the project and find a new architect.

palimpsest Yes I was reading this clear to the end. I really enjoyed your comments. Also comments from many others. Seriously considering closing in part of my front porch some day and do not want some thing like this to happen. Just doing research now. will come to this board whe I have saved the $$ to do my simple I hope close in.

"will come to this board whe I have saved the $$ to do my simple I hope close in."

You will surly get lots of opinions to chose from.