@sprink1es - the bad news is while changing garage size is a bit harder after the fact, enlarging window openings or adding windows are generally doable, maybe at same time you change out some of the cheaper windows :)

I think even those who do totally custom homes have those "this would be different if we did it again", especially 10 years later....a lot can change in 10 years as to what you find functional and useful. Think of how "important" it was not that long ago to have a formal living room and formal dining room - even in "tract homes", and how many new homes now skip those formal rooms altogether (personally for me those are wasted space, so I skipped all plans with them, and in resale homes I looked at with those formal spaces just thought I would be paying space I would struggle to do something else with, or space that was just taking from somewhere else I could use space!).

Very true. And hindsight... Too late to change anything now, but it's still not the end of the world.

I hate how I put so many windows (west facing) in my current family room. We don't really use the room much until the evening (after work), so the sun is just blaring in... blinding me... so I close the blinds every day... what's the point of all those windows then... oh well :)

I've been pretty content in all of the houses I've lived in over the years. It's only in looking back that I realize how truly awful they were. Our last home was an 80's tract home, and it had a lot of flaws. I don't remember much of them bothering us, though. The problem is I now know the difference! It would be tough for me to go back to that house (for a number of reasons) after living where I do now. I'm always mindful of just how blessed I am to have a house at all.

As for natural light- my SIL has a sensitivity to light, and keeps her house very dark. Our kitchen must be agony to her, and the whole house lacks window treatments of any kind.

I grew up in a home designed and literally built by my dad (a middle school shop teacher). It was (and is) still very energy efficient, and we lived happily there. I bet if I posted a floor plan, it would be torn to shreds for all that it lacks. It's a simple two story, four corners, nothing fancy. They still live in it today... happily.

Mgh - you might be surprised but simple designs are fine here.

People can live happily in a proverbial cardboard box. Doesn't make it ideal.

The beef most have here are designs that don't make sense. They lack practicality and are meant to impress. Angles, excess corners, hodge podge of design elements. All things your dad didn't do.

I am living in a 1980s house. Perfectly fine floor plan. It should have a slightly bigger shower and closet. It should have a bit more windows. It should have 9 foot ceilings. But I could certainly live here happily ever after.

@mushcreek - I don’t have a sensitivity to natural light but don’t put me in sun for too long - natural redhead here!

But I do tend to find spaces that are not *overly* light cozy and comfortable (example - my office at work has two floor to ceiling windows and I keep the blinds closed always, and use just a small LED lamp on a “low warm” setting).

Our new build does have plenty of windows in my view, but we did not follow the windows on at least two walls where you can thing, because I like rooms to have some cozy “darker” corners, plus we like to hang original art, prints, rugs and more windows = less wall space. At least in the <2000sq ft size house we are building. If I have too many windows I end up closing a lot of blinds or drapes and looking at those instead and I’d rather see art! Maybe it is a result of my teenage bedroom/hangout being in a very private basement with only a few egress windows - I associate dimmer spaces as a refuge!

I think for me it is all about the variety, or contrast. A nice bright well lit great room is great, as long as I can also choose to move to a dim but cozy den or study.

My husband does joke sometimes I am a bit of a vampire.

When it comes to residential design, it's always a situation of: 1) Does one adapt their living to a house, or; 2) Is the house design based on one's style and preferences for living?

These are significant differences.

Of course one can adapt to almost any safe and sanitary method of living, especially if the rain is kept out and the interior temperature is comfortable for humans.

Of course one can often fit their lifestyle to almost any house.

And if that's one's goal in life, then almost any intact and safe house will do.

When it comes to choices in residential design, one's design knowledge and experience will make a substantial difference in priorities and decision-making...or the lack thereof will also make a substantial difference in priorities and decision-making.

If one wants to view an interesting comparison, look for houses architects design for themselves and compare to any tract subdivision, or group of builder's houses. To get started, Google "houses architects design for themselves"...

Of course people regret building internet plans and tract homes. People also regret building architect designed custom homes. The questions becomes do people regret building internet plans and tract homes more than they regret building architect designed custom homes. I personally doubt that they do, I suspect most people find reasons to be happy with their decision and reasons to regret their decision.

There is an inherent problem with discussions on satisfaction of living quarters. That problem being that people in general are very poor pursuers of happiness. We try to create environments that are conducive to a better life in hopes of a better life happening, when the reality is that the quality of where we live may have small impact for many on how they live, while for others it may have great impact.

The best place I have lived was a small apartment in Paris, the bathroom had a wall mounted toilet with about 15" to a wall mounted sink, and sticking out of the ceiling between the two was a shower head that you controlled with a valve on the sink, that went to a floor drain. The toilet tissue was kept in ziplock bags and when you didn't seal the bag properly life could get interesting... But we were a young couple in love in Paris, it was a good time.

“@virgil “If one wants to view an interesting comparison, look for houses architects design for themselves and compare to any tract subdivision, or group of builder's houses. To get started, Google "houses architects design for themselves"... what are your thoughts on “tract homes” designed by architects

https://uniformdevelopments.com/building-community-one-uniform-development-at-a-time/

If one wants to view an interesting comparison, look for houses architects design for themselves and compare to any tract subdivision, or group of builder's houses. To get started, Google "houses architects design for themselves".

You get a massive bias doing that. I mean the architect who buys a tract house in a great neighborhood with a great school district isn't going to post a picture of that house.

Virgil, did you design your house? Or did you find a location that was convenient and met your needs and decided that you would live with the design for the other conveniences?

"...what are your thoughts on “tract homes” designed by architects..."

There are some excellent "tracts" and developments designed by architects. For example, the Eichler homes in California, developed by Joseph Eichler and designed by some of the leading architects of the time in both northern and southern California. Eichler was one of the few developers to use noted architects to design his mid-century modern homes.

I lived in Palo Alto in an Eichler designed by Bay Area architect Claude Oakland. It was an atrium plan, and a wonderful home in which to raise a young family.

Unfortunately, these sorts of developments, where developers retain respected architects to design their developments are few and far between. It takes a lot of searching to find such developments.

"...Virgil, did you design your house? Or did you find a location that was convenient and met your needs and decided that you would live with the design for the other conveniences?..."

Thanks for asking. I've been a military and corporate nomad for most of my working life. I've lived in military housing, Special Forces combat camps, rental short and long-term apartments, an 1860s townhouse in New York, various houses designed by architects, and in my own architect-designed home. There's a world of difference between and among all of these, as I'm sure you know...

That said, I would always design my own house, if that is a possibility. Short of that I would look for an architect designed home every time.

As for "bias", I have no idea what you mean. My point was that it can be very informative to compare tract and builders houses with houses architects design for themselves. Comparisons couldn't be more striking in many cases, and learning what architects design for themselves is one way to expand one's awareness of residential design.

It may be a lot more informative than spending hours browsing Internet plan factories.

That said, I would always design my own house, if that is a possibility. Short of that I would look for an architect designed home every time.

Just to be clear, I think we all would, but sometimes for various reasons it isn't viable, or the pathway to that goal is more difficult than people want to endure. The question then becomes how important is a well designed house to one's happiness. We talk a lot about good design and poor design and the difference and all of that, but when you get to the nuts and bolts I wonder how many people end up happier in poorly designed homes than they would in well designed homes.

We can't know that for sure, but we can ask the people who promote the importance of great design, if they currently live in well designed homes and are they happy in their home.

As for "bias", I have no idea what you mean.

I mean the question has a confirmation bias. It begins with the assumption that an architect will choose to design his own home rather than buy a home designed by someone else. Suppose for example, that only 20% of architects design their own home, and 30% live in developer built homes. Looking only at the 20% creates the illusion that architects value well designed homes, but looking at the homes of all architects would get you a different picture.

Relax bry911, you're barking up the wrong tree...all I suggested was for interested folks to Google "homes architects design for themselves".

This isn't some sort of statistical analysis. It's not a dissertation or scholarly endeavor!

It's simply a way to increase one's awareness (and perhaps build some initial understanding) of the things architects do in their own homes, as an alternative to the way that tract, builders and Internet plan factories do things in their homes.

It has absolutely nothing--zero, nadda--to do with architects who design and build their own homes versus architects who do not.

Relax, bry911...everything will be alright...really!

We finished building our 5th custom home a couple of years ago. It's an occupational hazard.

@bry911 - my favourite place to live so far in my life - at I get dangerously close to 40 - was an attic loft in an old Victorian, with a steep three story walk up (two stories of that outside, on wooden stairs) in a climate that definitely deals with the pleasures of all seasons. The only walls in the interior were for the bathroom. The ceilings were vaulted, but overall not very high (where they met the wall, even 5'4" me easily bumped by head!) and there were a few small windows along front, one in very back, and one in kitchen off side. The space barely scraped 400 sq feet, including the entry space at the "second" floor of the walk up where I had room for a washer, dryer, and to store my bike (which yes, I hauled up and down those stairs!). I had a futon to sleep on as my bed...and another futon to sit on as my couch. All of maybe 15 feet apart from each other, ha.

But I loved it. I was in my late 20s, newly single after a long live-in relationship, renting again after a mortgage, back in school pursuing a professional degree. It was my "fresh start" home and it was glorious! I loved that walk up to my "private escape" everyday as I came home. It was while living there I also met my now-husband and we started dating.

My second favourite place to live so far was our basement apartment (in a post-war tract bungalow) when we decided to move across the country, and in with each other, only a few months into dating. It was newly renovated, but it was small and the furnace died regularly as it was too small for the property. It was where we really "grew", and eventually were engaged, and married, while still living in that basement apartment.

Like you said, it was all a good time. Anticipating our next home to be another place of such joy and warmth, even if a "production" home.

I suspect most people who live in "spec homes" or "production homes" like them just fine. I think most people don't think like the people on this board and don't stop to consider optimizing a home's design or function. I know that when I started reading this board and books about design, I became less satisfied with my house! Prior to my "enlightenment", I disliked my small closets, but I hadn't really considered -- for example -- that the laundry should be located nearer the bedrooms.

And that is why, Ms. Pete, I suggested that folks interested in residential design Google "houses architects design for themselves" as a simple way to build awareness and understanding of how informed residential design may happen.

It doesn't mean everyone will (or should) like every home which every architect designs for themself. It's simply a way to gain more awareness and understanding about alternatives to tract, builder's and Internet plan factory "designs".

It's a way to compare good design principles versus features, fixtures and finishes, a la HGTV.

And as for folks having fond and romantic memories of places they've lived, excellent! Good memories are priceless.

But I'm talking about what makes good design. Good design also makes good memories. But one has to know what good design is first...

But I'm talking about what makes good design. Good design also makes good memories. But one has to know what good design is first...

But that it is not what this thread is about. This thread is about whether or not people regret buying a tract or internet plans for homes. The answer to that question is a lot more complicated than see what architects design for themselves.

Every community becomes a bit myopic, finance boards become overly concerned with the return on an investment, political forums become focused on sharp political divides, and the building a home forum is currently focused on design. Holding all else equal, good design is good, but how often can we really hold all else equal? There are many other things, (even things other than memories) that go into making living somewhere a good decision, while certainly design is one of those things, it is very far from the only one.

The old saying location, location, location comes to mind, I suspect that a good location makes up for many design flaws. Given the choice between the perfect house and the perfect location, I will pick the perfect location every time. If building isn't an option, well then it isn't, and if tract builds are the only option, well then they are. Budget constraints are also important, we have all heard the term "house poor."

Relax bry911, you're barking up the wrong tree

Am I really? I used Google as you suggested and found this.

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/104-Village-Park-Dr-Boerne-TX-78006/80249318_zpid/

It is a lovely home and I suspect the person who lives there is very happy in it. I doubt it is because of the design though, I suspect it is just a great home that met the persons needs at the time. Do you think this person knows the importance of good design?

Well...clearly you have little interest in homes architects design for themselves...or in any comparison of these with houses in tract, builders and Internet plan factories to see what may be learned by a comparison.

Hopefully, the idea will spark the imagination and energy of others interested in learning more about residential design, and how those educated and experienced in design go about designing for themselves.

Here's a 2013 article by John Hill on Homes Architects Build for Themselves, which offers some good insights on what architects value and prioritize in their own homes, as compared to what tracts, builders and Internet plan factories value and prioritize: [https://www.houzz.com/magazine/when-architects-design-homes-for-themselves-stsetivw-vs~8534762[(https://www.houzz.com/magazine/when-architects-design-homes-for-themselves-stsetivw-vs~8534762)

When architects design and build for themselves, they not only use sound design principles, but they often experiment and try various new approaches for using materials, and for solutions to common problems. It's their curious and inventive minds which leads them to try new and different approaches.

This is not to say that "everyone" can or should have a house designed by an architect (as good an idea as that is! :-) ). The point, as I have repeatedly said is that looking at architect's homes is a good alternative to standard home solutions typically provided by tract, builder and Internet plan factories.

Sure, I have found it interesting to see what some architects would design for themselves. Some of them are very interesting buildings. A few I could easily live in. Many of them - there is no way I would or could live in them comfortably. They may be architecturally interesting, and maybe even impressive, especially those that had to really work with some unusual characteristics of the land, but they would not be livable for *me*, and yes, I would prefer my “builder home” to them.

I don’t think @bry911 is arguing that a home designed by an architect isn’t an alternative to a tract, builder, or internet plan. Or that they aren’t different when compared. I am not either. Of course it is. They are just saying there are many other factors at play for many of us. Me included. I don’t kid myself that my modified builders plan which is essentially “plopped on a builders lot” (horrors!) is equivalent to a custom architectural built home on a beautiful piece of land with great views. Of course it isn’t. But reality is location, budget, building costs, how much even a healthy budget gets me here versus other places, timing, what I prioritize (ie travel and hobbies versus entertaining at home), commuting distance, preferences of others I share a home with, living in a safe community with lovely walking trails and parks, all matter more to me at this point in my life. I also know myself well enough to know I do not have the time and mental energy to build “from scratch”. Kudos to those here and those I know in person who have the resolve to take 2-4+ years to design and build a home - I do not have that kind of energy or patience ha ha. I have also had a very good experience working with my current builder. That was not just luck, but I do feel fortunate I can work with them.

Can I appreciate great architectural design? Sure. I love to look at what others design, and choose to live in. I am happy for those who work with an architect to design homes that they believe they will be happy to live in. I enjoy following the build threads here of people’s architect designed “dream homes”. But what I like even more is following people as they take something “basic” tract or “dated” and turn it into something that reflects them.

Would *I* be “happier” in an architecturally designed home? Would I live better? Would my life be enriched by it? For me? No, do not think so, as it is not things surrounding the design of my home that bring joy and happiness - or take away from it - in *my* life. I’d happily live in the most basic of builder basic home or apartment if it meant I was financially comfortable (ie not house poor), had my husband and furry ones nearby, and had flexibility in budget to travel 2-3x a year and enjoy my other hobbies.

Should I ever retire, and be able to live absolutely anywhere, maybe my priorities for an architectural designed home will change. Maybe not. But as of now, I don’t regret any of the “builder” homes I have had the fortune to live in. I am aware there is better design out there, and can appreciate it for what it is and what it serves others, but that does not mean I don’t enjoy what I have any less.

I also think that the way neighborhoods are being bought and developed by larger developers or large BUILDERS is significantly changing the architectural landscape of the country. SO many neighborhoods are developed and built by a single company - like Del Webb, or any other large national or regional builder. It leads to a particular homogeneity from choosing from a finite list of plans that have been chosen for their "cohesiveness" and that drives the houses having all the same look and feel.

Many folks find comfort in that consistency.

These builders also provide neighborhoods with amenities - pools; clubhouses; shared gardens; etc. They also pay the larger $$$ to buy the large tracts of land that become available in prime locations - therefore they become the de facto expected architectural "standard" because everyone "wants to live there". Ergo - this is what sells. And this is what we do to keep up with the Joneses.

Additionally, the other build and design "services" they provide streamline the buying process and "simplify" it. Enter the sales center, tour some fully furnished models that call out to the aspirational lifestyle, have what appears to be "low" costs to get a house (without upgrades), use a builder provided "designer" at a one stop show showroom, and then move to the builder provided lender who offers additional "incentives". All in, you may be paying commensurate cost for a true custom build, but it's can be at significantly less time / involvement on the part of the homeowner.

Wow, didn’t think this topic would take off as it did. Love the dialogue. The impetus for my question stems from living in many subdivision houses, both new and resale some of which were classified as “custom”. In case of new houses, I was taken in by the decor and ambience of the home. Of course the marketing is also very enticing. All of the homes I inhabited were filled with various and frustrating flaws. These included; angled fireplaces, furniture placement a nightmare, trip hazard ‘Sunken’ living rooms or extremely steep, curved stairs so can’t bring up furniture, and the worst, Dark rooms!

Other issues included misleading room measurements where circulation space is not considered. Is it not possible for production designers/builders to at least try to avoid major flaws?

It leads to a particular homogeneity from choosing from a finite list of plans that have been chosen for their "cohesiveness" and that drives the houses having all the same look and feel.

However that's been happening since the 50's. Think Levitt homes.

Janni, I was just thinking about a related thing, not 10 minutes ago, lol!

My thought was, what if a "hybrid" approach was taken?

Most folks are already obviously happy with limited floorplan choices, so it shouldn't be too big of a deal for builders to employ architects and say something along the lines of, "So, I need 3 respectful Craftsman (or Prairie or Storybook or whatever) plans that are 3bd/2ba, 1800-2200 sqft, for south orientation; 3 of the same for north; 3 for west; 3 for east; all on lots 50' wide," and *only* build select plans on the lot, depending on which direction it faces.

It's common for builders to limit floorplans on lots, anyway (some of the larger homes can't fit on the smaller lots, so if you want a huge house, you have to upgrade to the cul-de-sac, for example).

Maybe?

We haven't completed our internet plan build yet but I'm sure there's going to be things I wish I had done differently. That being said, I am hoping I won't have any true regrets. We are pretty low maintenance people and our list of requirements is short. We want a basement for DH's and the rugrats 'stuff'. They have a lot of stuff. A mud/laundry room near the kitchen. A large pantry. A front porch that can accommodate a swing. An island with seating for the 3 people that will live in the home. A separate dining area for when we have guests. And, the most important thing... No round or half round windows anywhere. The plan we chose meets those requirements. We were lucky enough to find a lot with a pond and room enough for a large garden. Those are the things I'm really excited about.

My thought was, what if a "hybrid" approach was taken?

IIRC, ARG did some darling little cottage-y, NE style plans for just such a development. It does happen, it's just not the norm. I think most builders don't want to pay for design talent, when they know most consumers willing to buy a tract home don't care.

Most folks are already obviously happy with limited floorplan choices, so it shouldn't be too big of a deal for builders to employ architects

Just to be clear most medium and large sized builders already hire architects to design the house. It is a liability issue, anyone large enough to get legal counsel will be told immediately to find an architect and probably an engineer for the design work. They just have a different set of constraints that make them uninterested in decent design.

"... I think most builders don't want to pay for design talent, when they know most consumers willing to buy a tract home don't care..."

This is one of the primary reasons tract, builder and Internet plan factory designs are what they are. As comments in this thread prove, many folks view their home purchases based on criteria other than design (read the previous comments), and the developers of tract, builder and Internet plan factory designs understand this very well. So if the home includes popular features--a mud room, a large kitchen island, a basement, a 3-car garage--and the home is "easy" to purchase or mortgage, it's gonna sell.

So why pay for design?

In addition, tract, builder and Internet plan factories like to do and redo what they've done before. They don't want to make any significant changes to their previous work. It's a "formula" approach to development--find a successful marketing "formula" and keep it up. This is why repeat subdivisions by the same tract or individual builders continue to look like (or very similar) to previous developments. And it's why Ms. ODD's hope for a "hybrid" approach for design and development infrequently takes place.

So why pay for design?

There are isolated exceptions to this, of course. And, of course, many families are perfectly happy adapting to their tract, builder or Internet plan factory home, as previous comments make clear. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.

But the title of the thread is "Has anyone regretted building their “internet” or tract ‘model’ home?", and looking at homes architects design for themselves provides a useful alternative by illustrating what those who are educated and experienced at residential design do for themselves, as opposed to what developers do with repeated subdivisions.

Just to be clear most medium and large sized builders already hire architects to design the house.

If that's the case, then they could either pay more for the talent (what would that add on to the price of the house? $5k on a $200k home? I have no idea), or not stifle the creativity/integrity of the design.

Although, the more I think about it, the more the answer becomes, "Educate the masses!!!" Bring back fine arts in primary and secondary schools -- Show people what "good" is supposed to look like. That way, more of the populace would at least be able to make an informed choice about it, and *that* could push residential tract architecture into a better place.

The additional $5K in professional fees will not be factored into the appraisal formulary because they will compare a most custom design to a vanilla plan. The valuation process is hard pressed to adapt to customization - especially after the housing bust.

(And if you can get the same price for the house at less expense.... builders, like salespeople, are coin operated.)

Whether one has regrets comes down to expectations. People buying a tract house or building from an internet plan naturally don't have the same expectations that someone building their custom 'dream' home do (that's a loaded term). Obviously when everyone on your street has a similar home you don't expect that it will work perfectly for you. And generally speaking the build process is much smoother than that for a custom home. I would guess that custom homebuilders are on average more regretful because you are expecting perfection, and real life rarely delivers that. With a tract home you know what you are getting and have come to terms with the benefits/trade offs. Of course confirmation bias would tilt the actual answers - someone who paid tons of $$ and spent years of their life building a custom home has a strong, if subconscious, incentive to believe they are happier with it than they truly are.

Here is one of the largest developers/builders in my area, who has home and community set trends for decades. If you want to live in a specific area, you have no choice but to buy from conglomerates such as this one. They buy up land sit on it for up to 20 years, if not more. This further precludes individuals from buying small lots on which to build.

https://www.minto.com/ottawa/new-homes-condos/projects/Minto-Through-the-Years~1066.html

due to this extremely interesting discussion, I was able to locate an article that puts our current house in a good company..bonus to reading you guys))

(and the whole website devoted to where find great tracts around where we live and what's for sale now..makes me happy. as if I needed one more house here lol)

and of course good memories coming to mind..from all sorts of places I lived..another thing to cherish.

@cpartist - well, and far before the 1950s!

I don't think similarity in floor plans or a general "cohesiveness" is unique to present times. You can find swaths of homes that share similar similar floor plans and such homogeneity likely since, well, people have been building homes to live in, be they from mud, snow, stone, or wood. Be they streets packed with Victorian single family homes, or English row-houses, southern "shotgun" houses, suburbs full of 3/2 post-war bungalows built for returning soldiers in mid-west, etc. The difference is the older "tract homes" get the benefit of modern eyes seeing them as unique compared to present builds.

I used to live in a 2 1/2 story Victorian "character" home built in the late 1890s. Most of the other homes on my street and a few streets over were also built around the 1880s-1900 (where they weren't, it was due to having to rebuild after fire, or after the place had just become inhabitable after time, neglect, etc). I went into many of them, as I made friends with others in the area. There was very little difference inside to any of them in terms of floor plan, except where owners had over the years made changes. On the exterior, like houses in subdivisions of today, they may have some variances in colour, and a few other exterior details. But it was certainly not like they were unique as apart from their neighbours. But, yet it was a very desirable area to live because the homes were seen as full of "unique" character.

And that is why, Ms. Pete, I suggested that folks interested in
residential design Google "houses architects design for themselves" as a
simple way to build awareness and understanding of how informed
residential design may happen ...

Whether one has regrets comes down to expectations. People buying a
tract house or building from an internet plan naturally don't have the
same expectations that someone building their custom 'dream' home do
(that's a loaded term) ...

Yes, that's what I was getting at in my other post. Not everyone approaches building a house with the same expectations or interest level. Here's an analogy:

I make wedding cakes. I've been doing it since I was about 10, and I'm really good (not to toot my own horn). I only make custom, full-service cakes. If you buy a cake from me, I will show you a wide variety of cake pans /sizes ... I will show you my cake stands and fountains (and I know where to rent more) ... I will sit with you for hours and draw ideas ... and I will bake any type of cake (and filling you choose, and -- believe me -- everyone at the reception will be amazed at the taste. My cake will contain internal supports, which means it can be cut without being disassembled ... this means the people at the back of the line can see the cake set up. If you wish, I will make every layer a different flavor. I will talk to you about the table upon which the cake will set ... tablecloth color, lace vs. burlap vs. flowers ... I consider the setting to be integral to the whole cake's look. I will deliver the cake, set it up, cut it, disassemble the whole thing and pack it up into individual take-home containers, prepare the top layer for the freezer (with instructions on how to thaw it) and clean up afterward. You will be absolutely thrilled with the cake I'll make, but I certainly don't do all this work for free.

Some people care very much about their wedding cake, are willing to sit with me for hours debating the merits of basket weave sides vs. fondant icing, and are willing to pay my price.

Other people just want a cake, and they don't really differentiate the difference between my cake and a $100 cake from Costco, which will be picked up by the groom's mother and plopped on a table. These people don't really see a lot of difference between my cake and the Costco cake.

You can't care about everything. Some people care greatly and are willing to take the time to learn about houses ... others are fine with a Costco version.

Mrs Pete..I agree..now OT, sorry, but I was reading your post all starry-eyed, and I have deep personal interest..)) do you bake gluten-free too?

@Mrs Pete

I did not even have cake at my wedding - no, not even Costco, so I am likely not your target person to talk cake with, but I am most definitely craving cake now (lemon please, with lemon filling...maybe alternated with raspberry....).

I didn't even have a wedding (well..the second one lol. first one was very modest. don't remember any cake frankly. if it was there i didn't touch it)..but reading about Mrs Pete's cakes makes me reconsider..))

"...You can't care about everything. Some people care greatly and are willing to take the time to learn about houses ... others are fine with a Costco version..."

Absolutely right. My postings are aimed at those who want to take the time to learn. Costco folks simply don't care. And that's fine.

But it reminds me of the old saying, "You can have your cake and eat it too...! :-)

I thought it was "you CAN'T have your cake, and eat it too."

Or maybe "you can't have your Kate, and Edith, too."

I forget.

I can't have my cake or eat my cake.

Yikes! Turn off brain while typing: "...I thought it was "you CAN'T have your cake, and eat it too."..."

Yes, of course that's it! You can tell I don't bake...

"...Or maybe "you can't have your Kate, and Edith, too."..."

Vera funnee...!

Mrs Pete..I agree..now OT, sorry, but I was reading your post all starry-eyed, and I have deep personal interest..)) do you bake gluten-free too?

I can bake gluten-free. It is more difficult in that the finished product tends to "spread" and don't like to stand up straight, and they require more internal support ... which is something you want in a wedding cake.

If you need to serve gluten-free people, these are my suggestions:

- Go with a single layer of gluten-free cake ... most people don't care about gluten, so this allows your baker to do what's easiest for the majority of the cake.

- Make that layer one of the small layers.

- Consider carrot cake as your gluten-free layer. Most people like it, and it's an easy choice for gluten-free.

- A whole different thought: Opt for cheesecake, which isn't always gluten-free, but absolutely can be made without that bitty-bit of cornstarch or flour. Yes, a cheesecake can be stacked. If I were doing this for a wedding, I'd offer a variety of self-serve toppings: Strawberry, cherry, blueberry, chocolate, nuts, maybe coconut.

I did not even have cake at my wedding - no, not even Costco, so I am likely not your target person to talk cake with, but I am most definitely craving cake now (lemon please, with lemon filling...maybe alternated with raspberry....).

And that's the point. A whole lot of people just want a house ... they'd see a difference in 3 bedrooms vs. 4, but their eyes might glaze over if you started talking about optimizing the kitchen or the merits of different types of windows. Aren't they just ... windows?

As for lemon, I am making a small wedding cake tomorrow for the royal wedding. My daughter (but not her English husband) is absolutely insane over the royal wedding. Since it's just for us to play with, I am experimenting with a "naked cake" ... it will be lemon (my lemon cake is INCREDIBLE, if I do say so myself) with fruit (or maybe just blueberries? I haven't been shopping yet.) and lemon cream-cheese frosting between the layers. I am driving this cake over to the hospital where my daughter works because she and her fellow nurses are coming in to work early to watch the royal wedding, and I'm going to watch with them.

How'd she convince them to come in before 6:00 am? She promised them my cake, and she reminded them of the cake I brought them recently ... it was two layers of carrot cake sandwiching a layer of cheesecake.

It was better than what I made for my co-workers on St. Patrick's Day: I experimented with a Green Velvet cake (like red velvet, but containing an entire bottle of green food coloring) sandwiching a cheesecake ... the next day every one of us was confused: we felt fine, but we were all pooping green. When we all realized the source of our malady, we laughed 'til we cried.

If you like lemon and raspberry, try Key Lime Cake with Raspberry Filling. I made a simple three-layer cake (with raspberries on top instead of flowers and whipped fluff icing) for a casual wedding that featured BBQ ... it complimented the food very nicely.

I thought it was "you CAN'T have your cake, and eat it too."

We always seem to have cake at my house. We eat it, and we still seem to have more.

Current house is someone else's fully custom house.

I've always wondered why realtors advertise that a house is "custom". That means it was built to someone else's taste. Doesn't seem to be a selling point to me.

[...] it will be lemon (my lemon cake is INCREDIBLE, if I do say so myself) with fruit (or maybe just blueberries? I haven't been shopping yet.) and lemon cream-cheese frosting between the layers.

[...] I experimented with a Green Velvet cake

[...] try Key Lime Cake with Raspberry Filling. I made a simple three-layer cake (with raspberries on top instead of flowers and whipped fluff icing)

TORTURE!!!

Why are you doing this to me?????????

Dang. Now I want cake for breakfast. Make mine key lime with raspberries, please.

I've always wondered why realtors advertise that a house is "custom". That means it was built to someone else's taste. Doesn't seem to be a selling point to me.

Agreed. I generally avoid these like poison ivy. Mostly because I can drive through a custom (or not-so-custom, lol) subdivision and find *maybe* 2 or 3 (if I'm really lucky) homes that look halfway decent on the outside... And if the families who built them didn't care what the exteriors looked like (or had no sense of color and design), what *else* did they not care/have no sense about?

That, and I always think, "So it was a custom house, huh? And it was built last year? What's wrong with it that they're selling it so soon????"

OneDevotedDame, judging by how many times we were asked during our long gut remodel "And how's your relationship, guys? Things are fine? It's been a long time you're remodeling.."-it might be nothing's wrong with the house itself..

Once neighbors were building their house next to ours("ours" wasn''t ours..we were renting a tiny place in one nice lady's villa, separate entrance)..first it was an ongoing noice for a year or so, and then they divorced and never ever finished the house, and it stood there naked, sad, and empy...

Or other things happenned. Once, we bought(didn't build)t a townhouse where everything was ideal, to me. I found it within a week. Actually I found it on a frst day of house-hunting, I just wanted to make sure it's the one, so took couple days to see other properties and to think.

I spent there several happy months and then our ex's company sent us back here.

We rented it out. Renters did a fine job of ruining it over the years. In the end we decided to sell-were tired of managing property from over the ocean..and needed money too..(if I knew the prices would continue to climb-because appreciation was huge-I'd already buy my portion out and wait. Especially as I want to buy smth else there anyway)

So nothing was wrong with that townhouse, not when we bought it..everything was wrong with the company where my ex worked lol

Mrs Pete thank you for such a detailed great answer!