I see a TON of "bumpouts" on the first one. Unless you're talking about the sides/back. Who's going to see that? You? It's much less expensive to build without lots of jigs-n-jogs.

First how big is your lot?

Frankly both exteriors are too busy with all the bump outs, different exterior materials and different shaped windows.

On the first one you have 2 different window styles, 3 different cladding materials, 2 different gable tops, and the door is getting lost. Your door should be the focal point of the house. The first thing you see. Not the last.

The Frank Betz plan thankfully only has 2 different cladding materials, but it has 3 different roof shapes and 3 different window shapes not including the bumped out window.

Both plans will be dark on the interior even if the rear is facing south.

In the Branford you have a major outside corner where there should be light flooding the house, devoted to a pantry which needs to be dark.

Plus you have the powder room on that wall too which means anytime a guest needs to use the bathroom they have to walk through the kitchen and mudroom to get to the bathroom.

To use the laundry, means walking through the kitchen and mudroom to get to the laundry.

To get from the front foyer to the family room means walking through the dining room and trust me that people will not walk around the perimeter. They'll take the shortest path which is to walk in a straight line.

The usable family room space for furniture placement will more likely be 15' x 11' and not as noted because of the needed walkways.

The master closet takes up another corner that should be flooding the master bath with light.

The master bedroom should make use of the corner and have windows on the two outside walls.

The angled walk in closet in bedroom 4 will be mostly useless as it's not wide enough and those angles will limit storage.

Open to below means noise and more money for heating/cooling.

On the Frank Betz plan, I wouldn't want to be the person in bedroom 4 having to go through the laundry and past the kitchen to get to the bedroom. It would make a fine crafts room, but not a bedroom.

The living room will most likely wind up being 13' x 15'4" again because of walkways.

There is nothing to block noise between the living room and the master bedroom.

Again to use laundry means walking with loads through your kitchen area.

This plan has no pantry.

Does your lot require such a boxy / constrained plan?

I really appreciate the comments. I'll be building on a 1 acre lot.

Honestly, I don't see much to love about either plan. Hard to add to cpartist's thoughtful and detailed comments, but the garage in the Branford is too small. Our garage is 22x22, which is tight for a minivan and a Jeep, plus bikes, lawn mower, and some storage. I really don't care for the entry/dining room in both plans.

If you're building on a 1 acre lot, why would you need the garage stuck onto the front of the house? These two plans with the garages stuck onto the front are meant for narrow lots, not 1 acre.

I also don't want a cookie-cutter-type plan.

Both these plans are cookie-cutter plans. If you don't want cookie-cutter, why are you looking at plan factory plans where the idea is to appeal to the greatest number of people so the plan factory can make the most amount of money.

Put together a list of all your wants, needs, nice to haves, etc and go find a person of design talent to design you a house that is not a cookie-cutter.

We're going to have a side entry garage.

The two plans give us what we want in terms of layout. We're not willing to pay extra to hire an architect, etc. if we can find a plan online that we're satisfied with.

"I also don't want a cookie-cutter-type plan. Below are the two [cookie-cutter-type] plans I am debating between."

I'm confused??

How much extra do you think you would pay to hire an architect? Are you basing this on fact or hearsay?

It would probably be very helpful to be VERY specific about what you really like best about these plans- especially in terms of layout. Think about the relations ships of one room to another, how you would move between them, etc. Think not about the measurements of the rooms and the number/types of rooms. For example, while there is a large living room, it actually has a much smaller area for furniture placement. I think being specific will help you see what you like, and also what you're giving up with these plans.

I'm not a fan of either one for lots of the same reasons above.

As you have room to spread out on an acre, this house (either house) will look "odd" in it's constricted boundary / design that is much more suited to a smaller infill lot or something that is 1/3 acre or less.

Drees Homes is a production builder that is trying to pump the most amount of square footage into the least expensive shell - this the straightness and the lack of any definition in the box shape. This maximizes their profit. They also usually stuff as many houses as they can on small lots, again - thus the overstuffed appearance.

It really wouldn't take that much work to move the garage of the Betz plan to the side and provide a more gracious home, better suited to a county size lot. It would provide more light in the dining room, too.

Too funny. I suppose both plans are "cookie cutter" seeing as though they're online. I'll give you that.

The footprint of the Drees is 50' x 45' versus the Frank Betz footprint of 57' x 55'

The Frank Betz plan seems to not try to throw everything in the smallest footprint as possible, which is what is drawing me toward this plan.

No they're cookie cutter because each one is almost the exact same layout as hundreds of other online plans, and they all have exteriors where they have moved boxes around to create the interior, so on the exterior they have bump-os and jigs and jogs that they need to "dress up" with too much "bling".

These houses remind me of the movie Pretty Woman, where Julia Roberts dresses like she thinks men want with lots of cheap jewelry, short shorts, a blond wig, high boots etc.

When she is transformed with stylish understated clothing she reminds me of a well designed house where less is more.

Also have you looked for architects? You are assuming you can't afford them.

What part of the country are you in? Which way is North? How many people will be living here?

I'll concentrate on the Frank Betz plan, starting upstairs.

I'm not a fan of 2-story rooms (especially foyers), but that's a personal preference.

None of the closets are big enough for walk-ins. It would be much more efficient if bedroom 3 and the bonus room shared back-to-back reach in closets (without dimensions, I'll guess that it would be close to enough space). Then Bedroom 2 can have a reach-in closet where the bonus room closet is shown, and the upstairs bathroom reconfigured with more space.

There is no place for guests to hang coats/umbrellas.

Coming in from the garage, you enter a small hallway - and everyone has to get their coat out of the tiny closet before anyone can open the door to the garage. This may work for 1 or possibly 2 people, but would be a royal pain with kids.

As cpartist pointed out, the location of bedroom 4 is wonky - along with the only "public" bathroom on that floor. There's an awful lot of traffic through the kitchen. The bathroom by bedroom 4 is teeny tiny - and there is no storage nearby - certainly not in the laundry room.

The breakfast nook is small - especially when it contains the only door to the back yard. A slider for that door would help.

The living areas are going to be dark - no matter which direction the house faces. The covered porch in front shades the dining room and foyer; the kitchen will get no direct natural light.

I would not want to walk through the bathroom to get to my closet, but I know this works fine for some people. The closet also has a disproportionate amount of floor space relative to usable hanging space - not to mention a window, which not only takes away hanging space, but fades your clothes.

BW - as someone that had a draftsman prior, final prints, bids back and was basically ready to dig, we are beyond grateful that we stumbled upon this forum and ultimately our architect Nick. The thought of hiring an architect never crossed our mind at any time, that was until we were informed that there were some issues with the house that we needed to address. Nick was beyond wonderful and honestly, our house really is everything we wanted. If there's one thing in this process that I would do different, it's turning back the hand of time and skipping the endless emails back and forth to our draftsman, I feel like it was wasted time. We thought we liked our prior floor plan, but we're in love with the new one.

It's funny that the first thing everyone does on this forum is look for gems of info to avoid hiring an architect then gets feedback that their treading on thin ice, then moves forward without hiring an architect, then in retrospect tells everyone that if they were to do it again they'd hire an architect first.

we lost a 1500 design deposit to a builder. That couldn't design what we wanted. Then lost 3 months designing with s builder and draftsman that ultimately didn't get approved by the bank because "they had the worst credit the bank had ever seen". Now are finally building with our 3rd builder. A plan that we love. An elevation that we love. A home that we can't wait to live in with all the finishes we didn't know we wanted. But we're paying for some ad hoc upgrades, and we're about a year farther into the process than we wanted to be with 6 months to go. (18 month double property taxes = 10k.).

Tomake a a long story longer. If we ever do it over again we'll hire an architect first and then bid the build. We'd pay more up front but save more on the final product.

good luck! It's an exciting process from start to finish and you're going to learn more than you thought was possible through the process.

It seems to me that you've confounded the choice of builder and home plan. I think you'll be better served if you make the choice of builder and plan separate decisions.

The Banford house: do you want to walk right into the dining room when you come thru the front door? Also, there is not an area in the kitchen for a table and chairs - you will be eating at the bar all of the time.

The Shoal Creek has too many bump-outs in the back = expensive. And, if you have a basement, the foundation for this house is also going to be expensive - the footprint on the first floor is almost 3x bigger than the second floor. This house is currently 2403 sq ft - if this were a traditional 2-story rectangle, there would be 1200 sq ft on the first floor, which is a less expensive foundation than a 1789 sq ft first floor. Again, this is important for homes with a basement. And, I don't know if you only want a home with a master on the first floor - which may rule out many traditional 2-story homes.

Look at the Frank Betz plans again. Keep in mind all of the suggestions everyone has given to you about no bump-outs in the back, closets, layout. There are many Frank Betz plans that are more-straightforward. Ask your builder if they have an architect they use that can work with you on one of the Frank Betz plans.

Your home will look "cookie cutter" if you go with the current trends that are popping up in all of the new housing developments. A good builder will give you guidance on how they can work with you to create a classic (which is rare now) or unique exterior. Too many gables, extra peaks, mixing stone/shakes/brick is cookie cutter at the moment (sorry!). Good luck!

Geeze, there's always so many biased heuristics on this forum, if I can personify a house for a second. Certain characteristics are garbage when found online, but perfection of an architect places them, I guess.

Anyway, I don't love either of the plans. The first makes guest walk through the dining room, no coat closet, but has a nicer mud room and pantry. The second plan has a better foyer (still no coat closet), but zero mud room and crap for a pantry.

I'd write down your needs/wants, your likes/dislikes for these plans, and keep looking. On an acre you should have enough space to accomplish almost anything

I'll just leave these here...

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heuristic

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/personify

I agree. I appreciate the comments however, likening the the plans to "lipstick on a pig" and that I'm "treading on thin ice" by asking for opinions of plans I found online after pouring through hundreds is a little much. Some posters of this forum can be pretty aggressively blunt.

Yes I am blunt. Sorry, it's the New Yorker coming out in me.

Believe me, I and most of the people on this forum do understand about pouring over 100's of plans. I know I did before I started designing my house. I too was hoping I could find something that would work for us on our narrow corner lot. No such luck. Every plan would have meant redoing some or most of it to meet our needs.

That's the beauty of building from scratch. You can build a house that works for you and your family. Just as an example, it was suggested to me multiple times that I consider turning our half bath into a full bath so that DH's study could be considered a fourth bedroom. However we're retired, with just the two of us and a dog, and we live in an area where the average age is retired, so decided we didn't need the third full bath, especially since it would mean an extra shower to clean. Again that's the beauty to design something specific to your needs.

However having said that, I stand by the fact that the best home elevations are not combinations of multiple applied trims, sidings, bump outs, window shapes, gables, roof shapes, etc, but are fairly simple shapes and forms where the eye is lead to the focal of the house which is usually the front door.

When there's too much going on, the house looks cluttered and your eye can't distinguish where to enter, etc. A good trick is to first close your eyes and then open them and see where your eye is led first.

When a house has too much going on, it becomes visual overload.

Thanks for your feedback cpartist. Could you provide a link or two of home elevations that illustrate what you're referring to?

I would suggest eliminating the Drees Home option. The builder will limit all of your options to the very cheapest materials and limited design choices. I've built something similar and it pisses you off when you discover you have a choice of five different white colors for walls and none of them do what you like. So, in the interest of choice and quality, eliminate these folks.

The Frank Betz is needlessly expensive due to the number of corners and roof complications. You would be well served to take a copy of this floor plan and a list of your desires to an architect. Let them design something that won't be as expensive to build and satisfies the needs of your family in a better way.

The architect need not be expensive. Rather, they should be a cost and effort saver. At the very least, they should be a break even. And, the added benefit is you get what you really want.

I've used a stock plan in the past on a truly custom build. But, I had become a very educated consumer and renovator. I had a fantastic GC. While it was a successful build, I could have done so much better if I had taken the time to get a good architect involved.

b w: I hope I didn't come across as blunt! I tried to convey some advice that was economical and practical. Last year, we purchased 4 acres and in a few weeks, the small, old house and dilapidated barn that are on the land will be demolished - and soon the foundation for our new house will be poured. We have spent a ridiculous amount of hours going over house plans - ourselves, with the builder and with the house designer - it becomes like a second full-time job, without the pay! We have learned so much and feel that we have planned for a pretty high-quality home without being extravagant or blowing money.

You have to decide on the needs of your family and your every day activities. If you absolutely want a master on the 1st floor, do it. If you do not care about a big foyer space, do what you like - you may have the kind of lifestyle where only a few guests per year use the front door! When you build a house, it's probably the biggest expense/investment of your life, and the last thing you want to do is move in and say, "I wish the powder room would've been closer to (wherever)". Take the TIME now to analyze details, not regret them when you move in.

Thanks for your feedback cpartist. Could you provide a link or two of home elevations that illustrate what you're referring to?

I will definitely do so later tonight but now I really do have a drawing to finish. :)

In the meantime, this is one of my favorite books and it helped me when I was designing my house. It shows examples with too much stuff and then how they would "fix" it so it is better design.

Also if you do a search on here about good design, lots of threads will turn up.

And lastly if you look at what I am building vs what I started with, again, you'll see I started with the proverbial lipstick on the pig. I knew it didn't look right, but had no clue how to fix it. Luckily the architects here helped me.

What Not To Build

Treading on thin ice was feedback I received. Just relaying my experience. Sorry you took it the wrong way. You'll have your own experience. Good luck. It's a fun process.

BW, here's a great site done with humor that explains a lot about good/bad architecture and why. The very first link explains it well and the others go into more detail. Yes she's talking about mansions, but the same concepts apply to all size houses.

Mcmansion Hell

Hi bw. I have been reading your thread and boy, I truly can relate to what you are going through. I have been exactly where you are now. I hesitated to post my tale and quest for the perfect plan, as I don't want to bore the folk on this forum, as I have posted it a few times already. However, you might find it useful, so here it is. Cheers ! http://ths.gardenweb.com/discussions/4449548/the-journey-for-the-plan-has-finally-been-realized-long?n=40

Hi BK how's the progress with your build.

Hi PG, still finalizing contractors, prints will go to the bank this week and still hoping to dig next month. We did get our quote from the local lumber yard back this week, wow, has supplies went up, nearly double since 2008 :(

We did get our quote from the local lumber yard back this week, wow, has supplies went up, nearly double since 2008 :(

We reno'ed our condo back in 2010. If we had to do it today using the same materials it would be anywhere from 2/3- double the price we paid back then. It's not only materials, but labor.

Back then I got Emtek door levers. Paid in the high $40's to low $50's for all of them. I can't touch those exact same ones today for under $90 a piece.

CPA - I literally was not prepared for the sticker shock. We paid $53K for building supplies for 1932 sq ft back in '08. We're doing 2115 with an extra 470 in the garage and our new bid is somewhere around $110K. Not to mention, electric doubled, builder doubled, plumbing went up about 25%...the list goes on. I realize our house is worth more today that what is was then, but it certainly didn't appreciate at that rate...