Mrs Pete wrote: "...Virgil, I understand the entry is long (for a house this size), but how can a room be vague? I don't understand..." Mrs Pete, place yourself as a guest or owner at the front door, and then transiting from the front door through all of the initial entry spaces to finally arrive at the living/family space. That journey is ill-defined and there is nothing in the process that is positive or rewarding other than finally, only finally, arriving into the living/family space. Enroute from the front door one encounters doors, spaces and changes of wall plane to the left and right, again and again. The corridor space widens, narrows, widens--on and on. One can only wonder what all the doors and spaces must mean and where they lead. Are these important or not? Why must I travel through such spaces to reach the important spaces in the house? It seems so thoughtless and unnecessary... This is the sort of thing that a consumer may not even recognize, but it's the thing that every experienced architect quickly sees as a major element in a bad design. The entry sequence in a well designed house is logical, provides positive images and encourages visitors and owners alike. Such an entry sequence not only rewards visitors traveling from the front door, but it also enables them to quickly and positively reach the home's major spaces. In these sketch plans the entry sequence is simply utilitarian at best, and the only encouragement is to close one's eyes until finally arriving into a more pleasant and inviting space. Again, as I said earlier, if none of this matters to you then carry merrily on. On the other hand, if you are sensitive to good design, for you and your guests, then carefully consider what visitors to your house see and experience, making these as positive and memorable as possible. It's the difference between shelter and thoughtful good design. Good luck on your project. This post was edited by virgilcarter on Sat, Oct 18, 14 at 23:03

I'm not saying I like everything about this plan but this plan is making me realize how much I liked the 90s. This plan is more traditionnal than most that we see here. First, I like that the greatroom is not directly connected to the kitchen. Second, both, the dining and the breakfast nook are large enough for a decent sized table and seatings, which seems to be rare these days with stock plans. I'm in the minority here and like formal dining rooms. I would skip the bar stools though. The kitchen needs work. You could easily add a window in there. And as others have mentioned, the island is out of place and wouldn't get much use with its minuscule dimensions. The master suite a needs work too. About the guest bathroom being used for guests.... it all depends on how you plan to use that space. If the guest bedroom will actually be used often, you can close that bathroom and squeeze a powder room where thekids nook and master closet are (I'm pretty sure this house was designed before we had smart phones, Ipads and all. The kids nook might have been practicle in the past but is no longer that relevant). Again, depending on who will live in this house, a Jack and Jill bathroom might not work. I don't mind the walk from the garage to the kitchen but think about it as others have mentioned. Again, I'm part of a small minority who don't park in the garage and count my steps everyday. You need a coat closet in the foyer. Could you use some kitchen space for that? The exterior needs help too. Simplify. Four different windows styles, three siding materials, two roofing materials, 4 gables with 3 different looks... I don't need to go further; you'll get tons of comments on the exterior. I am guessing that walk-in pantries and mudrooms were not as popular when this house was designed as they are now. That might be the proof that we don't truly need them but since they are so popular they must serve a purpose. This might be something you'd like to think bout before comitting to this house. Lastly, this plan might not be suited for you lot. I have to agree with Sina that addressing all the changes that need to be made to fit your needs and lot might just cost the same as hiring an architect for a real custom house.

Rachel please do yourself a favor and ignore DE. She really is someone who is here just to stir the pot. Plus she acts like she knows all about design and architecture but anything she has learned is just from one or two books. In fact each time she opens her mouth she more than proves her lack of knowledge and understanding of architecture and design. Better off listening to our excellent architects, Virgil, Mark, architectrunnerguy, RES as well as some of our contractors, Worthy, Millworkman, Jeffrey Grenz to name a few. In fact my house is as good as it is because I listened to Mark, architectrunnerguy and RES. Additionally are some very talented designers who regularly post.

Interesting, my grandparents built almost this same floor plan in the 1980s, but with a shed contemporary style and an attempt at passive solar design. Their house had the master on the main floor with access to the main floor bath both from the hall and through the closet. That bedroom was a little larger at probably 12x14, and the kitchen was probably 12x14 also, with an L-shaped layout and an eat-in kitchen table. The dining room was instead a deck, and the portion of the 2nd floor deck off the second floor guest suite that fell over the kitchen was instead an office. 15 years later they expanded the house by removing the deck and building a dining space, rearranged the kitchen to take up the full original footprint, and a third 2nd floor bedroom. Their house is compact, but has served them well for 35 years now. It probably helps that it also has a basement for storage.