It appears the three garage doors take up the largest percentage of the front facade so maybe you should select their color first.

Does the brick go all the way around the house?

Hi Mark. I think we have decided on black garage doors, modern steel from clopay. Each with two rectangle windows across the top. The stone does not go all of the way around the house.

If stone is not used in a traditional manner it will look fake or budget driven. carrying the stone all the way around the house as if it were a foundation material would be more traditional. Consider eliminating the stone.

Choose garage colors carefully or it will look like there is a small house attached to your garage.

From a post on another forum.

any suggestions for material to use on around the gable window above the entryway? Should we stick with the main siding texture and color or accent with a different color and texture?

Garage doors that blend in.

I think this looks great and stone not going all the way around the house isn't that unusual. Most people don't want to drop an extra 75-100k on stone no one sees.

and stone not going all the way around the house isn't that unusual.

No it's not unusual. It's a tract home trick that builders use. Just because it's not unusual doesn't make it look right. Stone was originally used as a foundation to hold up the house. Sticking it just on the front makes it look like a bad makeup job on a woman.

Sticking it just on the front makes it look like a bad makeup job on a woman.

I agree but I don't think most people have a "trained eye" to spot such discrepancies. In some cases, I guess ignorance is bliss :)

In some cities stone is required on the front but would be cost prohibitive all the way around.

I'm not sure i'd say it is a bad as a bad makeup job on a women - its just more like reality for most people. If it was the decision between higher quality finishes in the house and the ugly base stone all the way around - what would someone buy later? The better finishes.

Someone may not notice how bad it looks to just have stone on the front facade, but they will notice how nice it looks to have the stone on all facades of the house in a traditional manner.

I can't honestly say I've ever seen a house with stone all of the way around the base. If I have it must not have been all that memorable.

I suppose that's true, @Mark Bischak, Architect, but again, I think one has to know to look for it. I think most people tend to be enamored or distracted by other features of the home and really don't stop to say, "Well, they really should've put the stone around all sides to be authentic." A lot of people end up putting such lush landscaping around their homes that from the street, one can't really tell that the stone didn't extend to all sides, anyway.

That said, though, I fall into the camp that I wouldn't put it on there if I couldn't do all sides, but if one must put it on the front because of restrictions, I wouldn't spend tens of thousands of dollars to put on the other sides if I didn't have to. I'd put that money into really nice landscaping and/or a pool :)

we Are doing a pool. The back will have its own design.

Here is a few houses where the stone goes all the way around the house:

These are just a few that I did. I am sure there are a lot more that others have done.

That works with that style of home, but, personally I don't think it is necessary on this transitional/modern style that we are going for.

Just my opinion but I would nix the stone altogether. Way too much going on in the front without adding another material. I would also have the garage doors blend with the siding and use the front door for a pop of color.

Continuity of materials goes with any architectural style and is just good design. My practice has been in an area where traditional architectural styles are prevalent.

Stone just on the front says "this is really fake stone stuck on for looks", rather than a structural element of the home. It's immediately obvious that it's stone veneer.

Originally, stone veneers were meant to duplicate real stone without the expense. But everything you do that communicates clearly to the viewer that it is, in fact, just veneer, cheapens the look of that element.

So, here is an example of what it's supposed to look like. (Visbeen architects. They almost always do nice work, although not for the faint of budget). Here, the lower level appears to be stone, with the wooden framework of the rest of the house resting on it. A classic building technique. (See also: Shingle style homes)

Unfortunately, tract builders have spent years using it as if it's just another "style" of cladding material that can be glued on willy-nilly. So, instead of using it to hide cinderblocks and replicate a stone foundation, it's just slapped on the front.

So, here it looks like a stone portion of the house is actually being supported by a wooden segment. Which would be a very poor way to really build, and is part of why it's more than a little cringe-y

Just why? There is no rhyme or reason to this one:

Here, only on one side of the garage. So... we put the expensive decorative material on the car house, and in such a way as to dramatically demonstrate that it's not really made of stone...

Again, this just isn't a good use of the veneer. It doesn't look like, nor would you logically expect the two sections that are veneer to really BE made of stone. And, again, this house mostly says, "HERE IS MY GARAGE, and welcome to my house that I have attached to my GARAGE."

I can't decide if wrapping the stone two feet around is better or worse than stopping at the corner. From a design sense, none of the choices on this facade make sense. But we've gotten so used to it, because it's so commonly done. This doesn't make it good design.

Again, the two-story center section that doesn't look like a real stone portion tied into a wood house, especially when coupled with the stone used ONLY on the front of the garage.

Even on a modern design, poorly placed stone just looks cheap. The section next to the window is probably OK, but the silly little section on the garage is just more tract house tarting up.

We aren’t using veneer stone. We are using real stone “Valders Dove White Splitface Dimensional stone”.

I agree with you 100%, Holly, but I think most people have been trained by those tract builders that it is okay to use veneer stone in that manner. Very few are trained to look for the discrepancy, nor do they actually care.

If it's not actually made out of stone being fitted and mortared by a mason... it's a veneer. Often termed "thin stone veneer", when slices of real stones are applied.

@shead - I try to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume the goal is good design. If not?

Well, conducting to the watering place

a quadruped of equine race

is simple, but he may not care

to practice imbibition there.

But we've gotten so used to it, because it's so commonly done. This doesn't make it good design.

This is the crux of the problem. Most new home builds incorporate, and many new developments actually require, a brick or stone veneer, thus perpetuating bad design and it's this that trains people to accept is as normal. It requires reading and understanding to recognize it for what it is.

Personally, I wouldn't install the stone veneer if it's not being used all around the home and I would really try to remove the focus from the garages and even eliminate the cascading gables.

One more suggestion: if you were planning to install nice window trim only on the front of the house, please be sure to do it to all windows, you will be amazed at how much better and well-planned your home will look compared to others. By keeping the window trim consistent on ALL sides, it will prevent the back and sides from appearing utilitarian. All of the developments around here put their "nice" efforts onto the front façade and leave the sides and back plain, I can't begin to tell how unattractive it is, but I'm sure you've seen the same thing.