we are building a slightly modified Nicholas Lee plan 888-7. Hoping to break ground late summer/early fall.

https://www.houseplans.com/plan/2134-square-feet-3-bedroom-2-5-bathroom-0-garage-country-farmhouse-38336

we are building the loft, but will have spiral stairs. We are warming up the interior too, modern is not for me, but I do love the open floorplan. We live hurricane country, so had to reduce the windows as well!

Amy - I believe after I purchased a different houseplan from the same architect, I emailed houseplans.com and asked if they had any photos of the plan being built or completed. They sent me 10 or so. It is helpful to see what other people have done with the same plan.

Any updates pics? We have decided on this plan as well. Thank you!

Wasn't this design discussed in a long thread some time ago?

So sorry. Just asking for pics from people that actually built it.

@cyndy how did the build go?

This is a design DE should study carefully...

I've always like this plan, but what makes it so expensive?

Virgil,

if this plan got posted by a user it would be villified and destroyed and the maker would have to do it over.

lets see

1. powder room gas chamber with no windows

2 mech room with no inside access

3. so much space but no pantry

4. so much hallway square footage

5. large porches all around to block the sunlight

6. front door opens into the kitchen

7. all beds heads are on the same wall as a toilet

8. master bath gas chamber has no windows

9. closets with no windows

10. office is too narrow

11. not a good use of space.

12. too much wasted space in master bedrooms.

13. no garage

14. cool range in the island, and the range vent will vent up through the second floor office? or maybe sideways to an outside wall? or maybe no range vent?

and on and on and on

"I've always like this plan, but what makes it so expensive? "

it has a lot of wall area for the square footage - a LOT! . those walls also have a lot of windows, and then you have that two story window wall in the living space.

it also has quite a few exterior doors.

a lot of additional foundation for the porches, and the porches.

3.5 bathrooms

yes, this is not an inexpensive house to build

DE is so good at dissing anything he doesn't understand or want to understand.

You can lead a horse to water, but...

Facts matter

Understanding the facts matter too and you seem not to. You're so wedded to what you're doing you can't see beyond your nose.

Not a pro, just a dreamer. I am thinking the house would look more dramatic if the double porches all have 2nd floor decking, and change a few bedroom windows to French doors that open to the 2nd floor decks........

Patrick Edge - it is still a work in progress. We are GCing it ourselves and finishing up a pretty long punchlist before we can schedule the drywall. Most days my skin is not thick enough to post pics on here. Set up messaging and I will send some to you. Hoping we can finish enough to move in by summer? Living in our garage 20 feet away, so I think 'moving' will be a gradual process.

summersrhythm, adding second level decks to one or both porches would be a wonderful extra cost, if the day-to-day family used the house enough to justify the expense. If the house is to be a "second" house, vacation house, or B&B, the extra cost makes the upper decks questionable, IMO.

This plan has been discussed and dissected in other, previous threads. It is not perfect (what design is?) and could be improved in various ways to better respond to individual family lifestyles and preferences.

That said, the design is a strong concept for a small, simple house which, at the same time, includes strong architectural concepts, making living in the house a rewarding and enriching experience. The design goes far beyond mere shelter.

DE, on the other hand is an aspiring amateur who, based on previous posts here and elsewhere, apparently knows nothing about architecture and little about the design and construction of architecturally sound custom homes, beyond what personally interests him in his attempt to design his own home. He is lost, over his head and enjoying every minute of it.

Lurkers beware of his comments.

You see...there you go again twisting words to fit your own bias.

The reality is that not all architectural designs are expensive, and not all do-it-yourself or builder's designs are inexpensive. McDonald Burger houses are anything but inexpensive.

And then when it comes to costs...there are short term costs such as development and construction costs and there are longer term costs such as operating costs, and quality of living costs.

Each of us picks and choose which of these (or other) costs are our highest priority.

If a custom home is to be a long term investment and ownership, then I advise that quality of living is a major design priority.

You don't.

The vast majority "don't"...

Architecture Continues To Implode: More Insiders Admit The Profession Is Failing

https://www.forbes.com/sites/justinshubow/2015/01/06/architecture-continues-to-implode-more-insiders-admit-the-profession-is-failing/#314e76924378

This is hilarious. A consortium of design monkeys and the expected result...

"The initiative was to be a showcase for how the best contemporary design could improve lives.

The predictable result was weird, sometimes discomforting houses of non-native motley futuristic design that have virtually no relation to each otheror the beloved historic architecture of the city. A story in The New Republic called the 90-some houses a waste of money and a distracting sideshow: The homes were expensive to build ($400,000 on average) and the high-tech fabrication has made them expensive to fix; mold has grown on the untested experimental materials, and the eco-wood decks and stairs are already rotting. The neighborhoods are wastelands—failures of urban planning that isolate residents from social networks and public services."

I'm tempted to simply ignore all this nonsensical posting...but there's simply too much ridiculously wrong here to ignore.

First, Forbes magazine is hardly the most respected source of architectural knowledge or critique on our planet. Second, the article in reference above was written by a man who is self-admitted to be the "...president of the National Civic Art Society, a non-profit dedicated to promoting the classical and humanistic tradition in public art and architecture..." and thus one who cannot abide Modern architecture, the nemisis of classical and humanistic art and architecture.

The author loses whatever sense of creditbility he may have had, when, in the opening paragraph he writes, "...As I previously mentioned, Frank Gehry, the world’s most famous architect, recently said that “98% of everything that is built and designed today is pure sh*t...."

Mr. Gehery is most certainly not the "world's most famous architect", and never will be as the architect of designs like this:

And it's designs like this which make it ludicrous that the article's author would use Mr. Gehry as a credible spokesperson, and then go on to write that "...self-congratulatory, insulated architects are “increasingly incapable … of creating artful, harmonious work that resonates with a broad swath of the general population, the very people we are, at least theoretically, meant to serve...”

The photo above, typical of Mr. Gehry's work, illustrates that he is one of the leading practitioners of the very type of architectural practice the article derides. Is this design of Mr. Gehry's considered "...artful, harmonious that resonates with a broad swath of the general population..."? I think not.

The entire article is simply a hatchet job on Modern architecture by someone who prefers classical and "humanistic" architecture, whatever that means.

The article is simply not worth the time it takes to read it.

And since DE asked for an explanation of the value and purpose of a two-floor high open space for the living room of the house posted at the beginning of this thread, it's simple and quite clear to anyone and everyone with any architectural knowledge: spatial variety! Yep, that's the purpose: to create a sense of spatial variety within a simple, small house.

And that spatial variety comes with natural lighting strategies which help to make the house, with this space, greater and more enjoyable than without it.

Unfortunately, spatial variety is an architectural quality unknown to DE.

Finally, the idea that it's expensive to build or to heat/cool a two-floor high volume is simply ridiculous. Properly designed and constructed the two-story wall is as efficient as the wall of a two story house, since, in reality that's all it is...a two-story house with the second floor removed in the living room space.

As for operating efficiency, the space can easily be designed to be efficient in both heating and cooling cycles.

Once again, DE builds up a strawman...and makes claims which illustrate he's completely over his head when it comes to architectural knowledge and design.

It will be interesting to see what new gambit DE launches...

Sorry you feel that way.

Your faulty awareness and understanding of architecture seriously limits your views and perceptions.

Good luck on your do-it-yourself project.

...and the #1 reason residential architects are going the way of the dodo bird is because their faulty awareness and understanding of human wants and needs seriously limit their views and perceptions. It's no wonder that architects design less than 2% of new, single family houses.

http://commonedge.org/architects-design-just-2-of-all-houses-why/

"The #1 reason residential architects are going the way of the dodo bird is because their faulty awareness and understanding of human wants and needs seriously limit their views and perceptions."

As a researcher I find statements similar to the above to be the bigger problem. Show me some research that supports that assertion.

I personally suspect much of the architect problem is the same problem with any professional services, the Dunning-Kruger effect.

As people gain access to information they begin to overestimate their ability to process that information. Today, with software and websites, you can create or adopt designs that are far beyond those you could in previous times. However, rather than creating stronger designs most are simply creating stronger cognitive bias.

It is the baker, not the ingredients, that makes a great cake.

----

Additionally, I think people are generally bad at marginal analysis. They often assume that savings on design = more money to put into the house. However it is not a zero sum game. While the money is fungible the design isn't.

"Sorry you feel that way.

Your faulty awareness and understanding of architecture seriously limits your views and perceptions.

Good luck on your do-it-yourself project."

I'll take that as a compliment since my focus is durable, affordable, sustainable shelter for my family and not an egotistical art project.

my focus is durable, affordable, sustainable shelter for my family and not an egotistical art project.

I don't really want to wade I to this particular part of the discussion, but that really isn't your goal. If it was, you would start with a windowless one room box and add enough to make it code compliant.

Realistically, you are designing a house that enriches your life in some way. Which is probably the same goal that those who hire premiere architects have, they just have different criteria for enrichment.

"...Realistically, you are designing a house that enriches your life in some way. Which is probably the same goal that those who hire premiere architects have..."

While that may be the similar goals of DE and others who retain architects, the outcomes are far, far different. It's the difference between Bob Ross and Matisse.

Personally, I like the simplicity of the design, all these faux roof levels you see on homes now don’t appeal quite as much to me, and surely the straight lines and simple roof would work in its’ favour when it comes to construction? I think there are issues, the front door opening against a bank of cabinets is one glaring one. But it seems like you could make modifications. Here, basements are common and that is where I’m used to seeing utility rooms, I’m not sure where there would be a better place for it if everything is pretty much on one level, it could just be made a part of the laundry area.

It's no wonder that architects design less than 2% of new, single family houses.

That's why most are unemployed. With the internet and it's wealth of resources, who actually "retains" an architect anymore?

Side discussion aside, I like the OP plan! It could be done modern like shown or more traditional on the interior, and be beautiful! Love the porches :)

"...With the internet and it's wealth of resources, who actually "retains" an architect anymore?..."

Drat! I knew there was a reason physicians, attornies, accountants, pharmacists, vets...and even architects have so much more time for fishing and washing the car.

here, we can’t even extend the roof without an architects say so, if anything rules have become MORE restrictive, and things cost more...also the internet/phone apps are no substitute for actual experience and focussed interest in any field

"That's why most are unemployed. With the internet and it's wealth of resources, who actually "retains" an architect anymore?"

Is this sarcasm? Architects have unemployment rates of about 1.5%, which is probably the natural rate of unemployment for architects.

Thanks bry911. For some strange reason I got the feeling from this and other similar posts in other threads that Lovely Linda has no love for architects...but I could be wrong. It's happened.

My wife and I recently purchased a 120 acre farm in southern Tennessee and are going to build this home, with some modifications, on a hill overlooking the pasture and stream. Has anyone sourced the fireplace shown in the design? We want a wood burning unit, and possibly this is a stove, but we can't seem to find this anywhere. Thanks.

Did you keep the plan as is? Would love to see any modifications you have made. Thinking of building this home.

This home is beautiful, but definitely needs modifications. I read your earlier comments, Virgil, and I agree they hold value. The exterior is extraordinary. I wish I could make the inside the same. I'm not sure, if that's possible.

Well...this house is designed with a strong exterior-interior linear concept as the fundamental basis for design.

While some minor exterior and interior modifications may be possible, there are limits to what modifications may be made without losing the all important concept.

If the concept doesn't work for someone, the best strategy is to look for another house designed with a concept which is a better fit.

We are planning to build this home as well...I have looked at many designs and I just can’t sway away from this design. However, I am hoping to add a 4th bedroom in the home some way. For those of you who have built the home did you use a steel structure, make it like a pole barn home or have it stick built? Does anyone have interior photos? Did anyone install a heated floor?

Does anyone who built this home have pictures or any suggestion on what to do differently?