You have a very lovely home!! The white seems too stark to me. I think that the white should be warmed up to be more tan or khaki. Then I would paint the brown a color that coordinates with the new color. The left side of your home looks warm while the right side looks cold. Maybe the brown boards could be painted the same color as the house so that they do not stand out?

Looking through the "Tudor style" homes, I see that not many have a visible garage and the proportions are different from what your home shows. Do you know if the home was built to imitate a Tudor or if the wood strips were placed there to warm up the space above the garage. Your building department may have the original plans (or not). I think someone prior to you just put the wood strips on without regard to the actual distinctive peaked roofs that are an element of these homes. I also think you can safely remove those strips to bring out your home's individual non-tudor style.

Here are some actual Tudor style homes so you can see what I mean:

Remodeling in Roseland · More Info

Capitol Hill Renovation · More Info

Tudor Renovation · More Info

Cortez Avenue · More Info

^^^Take a look at this inspiration pic. It's possible you could rework some of the wood details to go toward this "Swiss Chalet" look :) At least the left side of the inspiration pic can translate to your right side shown in your posted photo.

Or you might not want the wood strips at all and go in a different direction. This is where a good architect can really help you with deciding what is the best for your home. You can even get an architect to do designs remotely. There are several here on this website that others have used successfully.

1. The two palm trees block the view of the front door and detract. They should be removed. That lovely triangle between the driveway and the front door begs for a flowering ground cover.

2. A cheap fix-up would be paint, especially if you and your husband can do it yourselves. The colors should be of your own choosing. This example uses Sherwin Williams #9023 dakota wheat with #7587 antique red doors.

3. If you have a bigger budget, then I would consider the following:

a) New more modern front doors (budget about $2,000 and up, installed)

b) More modern siding on the part of the house above the garage (budget about $3,000 and up: more if you do the entire house. )

I love the house color and personally I would keep it. I would change the front door - update with a whole new wood door or paint existing. I love front doors with detail or a lot of window. I would work on the grass - this alone makes a home look so much better. See if you could take out the brick wall surrounding the path and replace with matching bushes or flowers. I would take out some of those trees and plant new - give a variety in color and texture if your zone allows, for example a mix of red, yellow, and green leaf trees. Finally, hanging baskets off of the window above the garage could really pop! good luck!

Am I the only one bothered by the brick walk? It matches the house in no way -- not the color of the material, not the style with the grand columns and walls, etc. I think I'd take the paint suggestions above, and then I'd get a landscape designer to give me a new plan that involves removing the walk, lanterns, and palms, and redoing the front yard in a way that harmonizes better and shows both yard and house in a better light.

Also, for what it's worth, it's not important to make your house "stand out" (at least, not unless you're trying to sell it) -- it's important to make it look its best and feel like home to its residents. Don't worry about impressing the neighbors.

Thank you so much for everyone's input so far. The tudor details are original as most of the homes in the neighborhood look similar. I'm trying to decide if I should embrace it, just with a warmer color, or take down the wood accents and try to rework it. My husband would like to take out the cluster of three windows over the garage and put in two larger windows that would pop out a little more for architectural interest but I'm not convinced it will make much of a difference. And acm, it was a poor choice of words to say I wanted the house to stand out. I just want to make it the best that it can be. I have a decent budget that can go beyond paint so if anyone has ideas that would improve it's look I would love to know. Thank you again everyone!

I agree that the bricks do not belong on this property. They give the impression that the bricks were free and the homeowner said, "I'll take them! I'll find somewhere to put them."

I would contact architectrunnerguy here on houzz and see what he would suggest for your best design. Cpartist has used him remotely and she can tell you all about her experience. Don't be afraid to ask about fees - having a good architect is critical and will save you money in the long run.

Sorry Armchairshopper, while your verbal advice may be unassailably excellent, that picture you included strikes me as an example -- the epitome even -- of the most worst color combination that has ever been contrived. It is a horror that beige (or call it Khaki, wheat or whatever you want), with brown trim, has ever been used. That it has been copied into the millions of times is what makes it especially so unpalatable. In Florida, where I live, there are subdivisions upon subdivisions in which virtually every home is some variation of that exact scheme. This is statewide!!! It's gotten to the point that I have to keep a barf bag in my car just in case traffic is bogged down and I can't pass these subdivisions quickly enough! On top of that, I know from travels, pictures people have posted here, Google Imagery and the like, that this exact beige-brown paint scheme exists en masse throughout the world! Holy crying out loud ... can't we all just take a hard look and see that this color scheme is the most overused, used-to-death, unimaginative, unflattering, dingy, tired, worn out and nauseating scheme of all ...?? Let's, people, please, not use this scheme anymore! While those who will never visit this forum will unfortunately long remain clueless about how horrible it is, we, a small core group of enlightened people, can pledge to a pact of always using one of the other millions of better colors that are at our disposal. It costs nothing to pick a better color!

I agree with you, ACM that the walk is one weird one, with at least two features that cause one to ask, ".... WHY?" Because the picture is a bit small and fuzzy, at first glance I thought the post finials were silver SKULLS. I see, though, that they are just lights. The walk material used and its color, can probably become more compatible if the house color changes to a different and compatible scheme. (Greys/whites are going to be better with red brick than will brownish and orangey colors.) There is nothing that can be done about the layout of the walk short of removal and reconstruction. It's possible this can become more tolerable if something is done with at least one of the brick barriers that flanks the wall. Possibly, the grade can be altered at the near side such that the walk looks bermed and sunken. This would help the "wall" make more sense.

There is what looks like a Robellini palm growing out of the edge of the walk, smack in front of being in line with the door. This must go elsewhere or just go. The palm at the other (left) side of the walk looks similarly offensive, in that it blocks, or will block, much of the home front.

Other than that, it is hard to say what is needed on account of the picture being not too good, including that it is of a weird (raised too high, Google-ish) point of view. OP, please stand at the city walk, in line with the center of the house, and take slightly overlapping pictures that pan from far right to far left ... so we can see the whole scene from a human-eye perspective.

I would preserve the brick sidewalk. It was a large investment. It is the most expensive looking thing about the house.

Karen's home is beautiful.

In my area, the coppery brown roof was the most popular roof from the late 70's through the 90's. It holds up very well against mold and mildew. Because it performs so well, there is still a demand for the color. To Yardvark, it may be overused and used-to-death, but I see the large number of coppery brown roofs being the result of 20 plus years of building homes with coppery brown roofs. The color palette that goes with the roof is somewhat limited. Gray roofs have more flexibility with color choice.

My observation is that there are some people on Houzz who derive a sense of empowerment by going around insulting people's property. I find that sort of behavior to be offensive and disrespectful. The home that someone is trying to improve may represent years of work and saving. It may represent memories, or hardship. I try to find the positive aspects, to be respectful and make modest suggestions that will not overwhelm a new homeowner's budget or capability.

There are many things that can be done to improve the curb appeal. However, it is quite possible to over-improve beyond resale value. This is especially true for a recent sale, in a hot real estate market. If money were no object, I would:

a) look at adding a front porch with gable to make the entrance more prominent.

b) Install a showy new front door.

c) If needed, install brick on the house to match the beautiful sidewalk.

d) Install new siding, and if justified, new windows.

e) Install new garage doors (without windows) that appear to be siding to make the garage less pronounced.

f) Cut back the old overgrown landscaping, and when possible, get new landscaping.

If this is not going to be your forever house, you must be careful not to over-invest. It is already beautiful.

Armchairshopper, I do not see anyone insulting anyone's property on this thread so have to ask myself if you could be alluding to any of my comments ...?? To be sure, I insulted the worn out, sickly and and thoroughly dilapidated beige-brown color scheme, which includes the coppery brown roof from the 70' s that shouldn't have been popular more than, at most, 5 years. But that is neither insulting the OP or his property. And it is certainly not so I can go around with some kind of puffed chest. It is to be brutally honest about something that everyone should do everything they can to avoid. I'm not a believer in mincing words about what people should steer clear of. I do wonder what you're talking about.

I am from California. In olden times there was gold mining in my state. The front walk reminds me very much of a sluice box and leaves me wondering why. I would remove the sides of the walk.

Your house is not a Tudor so don't feel that you need to stick to that style.

Many people leave the timbering on the house and paint it the same color as the siding/stucco.

You are limited in house colors due to the roof. You do not want to use a color darker than the roof. Also, some colors will not look nice up to the roof. I made this image but I also changed the roof color.

HI - I really do not see a problem with the sidewalk ...once the house is spruced up it might look fine . That is a very expensive sidewalk , so removing that might be the wrong thing to do at this time . The house needs the attention first . It is unfortunate that things are read into comments that are only giving advice and not insulting in any way . It is usually how the person reads it and no harm intended . We are just all trying to help . I cannot find anything insulting reading all the comments ... sorry it is just not there . Lets all be nice and not bring a negative attitude into this . We are all just having fun ... well I am .... Thank You Friends !!

Karenk, I think your house has great potential. I don't see a problem with the roof color at all. We see it a lot in Colorado with stucco and stone siding. Since it's been raining here and I can't go out and garden, I played a bit with your house. To me, the tudor accents and dark brown trim are the biggest problem and the easiest to change. Rather than try to make your garage doors less prominent, I would do the reverse and make them stars, since they represent a little more than 50% of the front of your house. To make things a bit more interesting once the tudor accents are gone, how about something like cedar shake (by Hardiplank)?

I also don't see a problem with the brick walk. That is costly and would be ashamed to tear it our unless your budget is unlimited!!

Obviously, the palm in the middle of the walk needs to go, but the rest of your landscaping could wait for later when you have the exterior done. Then, you don't have to worry about workers stepping on things they shouldn't.

Obviously this is a very VERY crude painted-up version of your house. I was trying to illustrate how the home would look without the sidewalk and trees blocking the entrance. The picture is supposed to represent a grassy yard and a simple concrete pad in front of the door (somewhat mirroring the sidewalk going around the garage on the opposite side) and an orange-blooming-something beside the pad.

See how wide-open and inviting the house looks now?

HI -- You should never make house guests walk on the driveway to get to the front door.

Lefty, I don't know where you came up with that for a "never" rule. It is common in all of suburbia to use the driveway as a path to get to the walk to the front door.

Yardvaark you often say that just because something has been done for years that does not make it a good idea. I believe tract houses do not have separate paths to the sidewalk just to save cost. I think it is best when a guest does not have to sidle past a car to reach the front door.

I do think the picture posted by Littlebug looks better than what is there now. However, there is an existing path so I would try to keep it rather than pay the price of removing it.

I have hesitated to post because my one suggestion will undoubtedly be expensive. To me, the detracting factor is the expanse of concrete that is necessary to lead to the 3-car garage. Quite the opposite of others, I would ADD brick -- specifically to the driveway, to pull the whole together to some degree. Whether adding a few courses along the edges, dividing the whole into squares with brick, or repaving the entire drive, I couldn't say. But some modification would have a significant visual impact, at least from the vantage point of the photo you have presented.

Click here to see various examples on the internet.

HI Yardvaark -- I never said it was a rule . I live in a huge city in Canada and we have houses that have only a driveway and no sidewalk at the front but it is so much nicer to not have to shimmy past cars to get to the front door . Driveways are for cars and not for people ! It is just common sense to have a pedestrian walk to the front entrance and much more polite too . We are very fashion forward and polite here in Canada !

Lefty, when one uses the word, "never," in conjunction with a directive, one is implying a rule, even if they don't explicitly say it is a "rule." "Never swim alone" means that there are not times when it is OK to swim alone.

I began to get the idea that people thought I was for removal of the walk. So I had to re-read what I said and discovered that the pronoun "this" made it unclear what I was saying, since I used it after the sentence which included "....removal and reconstruction...." Instead, "this" was referring to keeping the walk and working with it. (I edited that comment, above, so as to make it more clear.)

Emmarene, based on how more than 95% of walks appear, it can rightfully be said that there is an unwavering effort to cut costs at the ending point of most residential construction projects. That holds true in making the decision to not have a full length walk from front door to the street. In addition to that, it is partially to avoid redundancy. When a drive is long, it would not make economic or practical sense to have a separate walk running alongside the full length of the drive. What happens simultaneously in many, if not most construction projects, is that there is also a concerted effort to cut costs on the drive, making its width barely able to hold the number of vehicles it is designed for. As much as I complain about walks being to small, I would also complain that most drives are too narrow. But when the drive is supposed to do dual duty of carrying vehicles AND pedestrians, its width should be widened such that each car should get a lane and some access space, and there should be width added in order to accommodate pedestrians walking around the full length of vehicles. Usually, one does not design for what is rare, but for what is common, and it is common for cars to be parked outside of garages. I agree that no one should need to sidle past parked cars in order to get to the entrance. The drive there should be widened to include the walk. But once away from the parking zone, there is no need for additional width for pedestrians. Since pedestrians would rarely be using the drive at the same time as vehicles, there is plenty of room for them to walk unobstructed. Being stingy with the pavement where it is needed has never been a good idea, nor is it one I've ever promoted.

(Kiminpl, the link in your last sentence did not "take.")

@Karenk, it seems that too much discussion is occurring without your reacting to the comments. Will you be supplying better photos?

HI --@ Yardvaark -- Wow , you do have a way with words ... are you a teacher or a writer ? Such long comments trying to be right ! I have been on Houzz for years , almost from the beginning and I have enjoyed helping people and enjoyed bouncing ideas and opinions back and forth . I have at times have told people not to be nasty or critical or sarcastic of others comments . You seem to have good ideas but your presentation is a little forceful and long winded . If you could tone it down please and just give comments and ideas without the long lecture , it would be nice . But I just have to tell you ... you are kind of sucking the fun out of things for us lately ,friend . I Thank You --- The polite CANADIAN .... Lynda

About the link in my post -- it works for me, but if it doesn't work for you, do a google search for "brick and concrete driveway."

The link worked for me and if the brick walk stays then I agree to add brick elsewhere so the look is cohesive.

Well holy cow! What a tempest in a teapot. I didn't suggest that there NOT be a sidewalk - I must not have been clear on my point. I was suggesting that a sidewalk should not run right up the middle of the lawn. Cutting the small lawn in half, in my opinion, is a mistake. Nor should it be constructed of red/orange brick, which does not blend in any way with existing materials visible at the property.

Here's another (admittedly poor) rendering of the house, this time with a sidewalk added parallel to the driveway. The new sidewalk/entryway pad could be constructed of all manner of hardscape of either natural or manmade materials that would be close in color and appearance to the driveway surface.

Like this or this:

The one photo that was provided appears to have been taken by a drone with a wide angle lens. It distorted the view and flattened the perspective. The house has wonderful, hand-applied, genuine stucco on the front of the house. It's impossible to tell from the photos, but there is a possibility that the boards were installed after the stucco was installed. If that is the case, it might be possible to remove the trim boards, repair the stucco, and there would be marvelous flexibility in exterior appearance.

Here's a different view. It might be hard to tell from this grainy picture, but that tree in front has much dead wood on it.