Architectural taste

Exactly the case here. The garage is prominent in the front, because everything of interest is in the back, including the screened-in back porch that looks out over woods and a flood plain.

(I was experimenting with light painting when I took that photo, it's a 30-second exposure. To the eye, the sky was black.)

To be clear, I have no issues with a front entry garage on a typical sized residential lot. But when you have 15 acres of land...
 
Yeah, that's not just a front garage. That's a row of garage doors with a little alley way hidden in between for the front door.

You can do a lot to direct the eye to the more pleasing architectural details, even if you need to plant a big ugly door somewhere. These were design failures, in my book.
 
To be clear, I have no issues with a front entry garage on a typical sized residential lot. But when you have 15 acres of land...

Exactly.

A subdivision near me has all upscale homes with 1+ acre lots. The houses are all different, but most houses have a circular driveway to the front entrance, and a side driveway leading to a 3-4 car garage on the side of the home.

I used to think of "upgrading" to a home in that division, but gave up the idea because I wanted to ER.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't bother me to have the garage in front like that. But then, if it bothers some people, they'd presumably buy a different house?

Or I guess they could grouse about it on the internet instead. Complaining about others' tastes to a forum full of grouchy retirees is always fun and a pleasant way to spend a lazy Sunday afternoon.... :hide:

I love that people have different tastes. If they didn't, then everyone would have been trying to buy my Dream Home when I was shopping for it. The price would have been sky high.

And yeah, my garage is in the back but you can look down the driveway and see it from the street if you want. Oh, the horrors. :LOL:
 

Attachments

  • house2016_March_Googlemaps.jpg
    house2016_March_Googlemaps.jpg
    67.5 KB · Views: 30
^^^^ Haha. Grouchy retirees must be the constituency of the Next Door app, where 500 people a day can tell you everything they don’t like. Should rename it Next Boor.
 
I would never want my garage to be detached from the house. I go in and out of the garage multiple times a day. Our recycling bin is in there. My ebay shipping supplies are in there. Our stock of paper towels is in there along with various other things. I wouldn't want to have to put on shoes, and a coat depending on the weather, just to run into the garage to get something.
 
Or I guess they could grouse about it on the internet instead. Complaining about others' tastes to a forum full of grouchy retirees is always fun and a pleasant way to spend a lazy Sunday afternoon.... :hide:
:D
 
When my Greek Revival style house was built in 1857, there were no automobiles and, hence, no garages. When we moved in (1992), there was still a small, falling down stable close by the back of the house. In 2005, we tore that down and built an attached garage onto the back of the house. You can't see the doors from the street. In fact, it looks like many of the old houses in New England where they built the house with a barn back behind and, gradually filled in the intervening space with a series of smaller additions, so you wouldn't have to go outside to get to the barn.
 
I would think having a rear garage would make adding on to the house much more difficult and expensive.


Yeah, my typo, I should not try to post during NFL RedZone :). Meant to say when garages are in the front.
 
No garage (privileges) at the Old Homestead. I used to park in the business 4 car garage when I "owned" the property. Only garage at the condo is shared with a couple of hundred other cars - though we have assigned spaces.



So any of those properties with (preferably) attached garages look good to me. The standard here in the Heartland seems to be 3 car garages. So, those properties should fit right in. YMMV
 
Exactly. Why would you want the garage back there? That's where the fun stuff and great view is. Who wants to hear or smell the cars when they're sitting by the pool or grilling out on the deck?
Side entry would be ideal. Easy with a corner lot, possible with enough side yard.
 
I know it's a rarity for most of the country, but every single family home that I've lived in, that had a garage, had a detached garage. However, in each case, the house had been built first, and the garage later.

My grandparents' house had been built in 1947. They bought it in 1950. Granddad had an oversized two car garage built around 1969-70, or so. It's not hugely oversized, but I think something like 25x25 on the interior dimensions. Many of them these days, you're lucky if you get 20x20.

When I moved into the old family homestead across the street, it had an old building in back that had once been a garage, but it was only about 10x16 feet. It had been built for an era when cars were narrow, like Model Ts and such. By the time I took it over (2003), the building was really dilapidated. It wouldn't fit a modern car, but you wouldn't want to park one in there, anyway! I had a 24x40 pole barn built in 2005-2006. It was actually pretty far from the house, maybe 150 feet. However, it was also used more for storage than as a garage you'd go in and out of all the time. I kept my antique cars in it, but my daily driver, I parked up by the house.

When I started house hunting around 2016-2018, my ideal was a 4 car garage, but realistically I know that's a bit of a unicorn, and even a 3 car garage was a rarity. So, my requirement was a bit odd. The house had to have what I'd consider a "useable" garage, regardless whether it was a 1- or 2-car. AND, it had to have enough useable land that would allow me to build an additional garage to get me up to at least a 4-car capacity.

By "useable" garage, my definition was that I could easily get an old-school full-sized 2-door car in, be able to open the door wide enough to comfortably get out, and have enough room that I could store things along the walls if needed. I remember one house I looked at, had a 2-car garage, but it also had a small staircase leading into the house, that took out a few feet at the end of one of the bays. So effectively that side was only about 15 feet deep! It was on about an acre of ground, but had a lot of woods behind it, and sort of a community green space behind that. The way the house was set up, it would not have been easy or cheap to build an additional garage. Or, they might not have even allowed it!

I looked at some houses that had as much as 6-7 acres. However, thanks to the topography (steep hills/valleys/protected wetlands etc), building an additional garage would have been impossible.

It also got to the point that I could tell, without getting out of the car, whether a garage would be what I deemed "useless". I could tell, if the edge of one of the door openings was too close to the edge of the garage, so it would be a tight squeeze getting a big car in there. Many houses, even some in the $800-900K range, which were out of my price range, fell into this trap. Interestingly, side-load garages were more likely to be guilty of this sin than front-load.

I ended up settling for a house with no garage, on about 6.5 acres, with a lot of nice, level land. I did make a bit of a splurge, as the house has a pool. I didn't specifically set out WANTING a pool, and at first figured I'd avoid them. But then I decided I wouldn't cross out a house I liked otherwise simply because it had a pool. And in the end I'm glad I got the house I did, and forced me to treat myself to a pool. A house with a pool, I'd build a garage if needed, without hesitation. But if the house had a garage but no pool, no way in hell I'd take the plunge on building a pool. I know, not the best reasoning in the world!

Anyway, the garage I ended up building was 36x60, with three single-bay doors on one of the 36 foot ends, and another single door at the back of one of the 60 foot sides. Theoretically, you could call it a 9-car garage, just parking them 3-deep. Although the one corner in the back, where the staircase goes up to the loft, is a bit tight, so whatever car went back there would have to be small, or angled in.

The garage faces the street, but it's set back, with the front maybe 30 feet further back than the rear side of the house.

Now that I think about it, the house across the street from me also has a separate garage. And, from 1979-80, we lived in Southern Maryland briefly. The house Mom bought had an attached 1-car carport. However, years later, the new owner built a 2-car garage around in back, and closed in the carport for additional living space. And, my Mom and stepdad bought a house, with no garage, in 1989. Finally had a detached one built in 2003.

I think detached garages probably are common, out in older, more rural areas where you have a lot of land. With modern homes, especially luxury homes, I think it's assumed you're getting a garage, and it's easier and cheaper to just build the house with an attached garage, and get it done all at once. But, with an older house, it's a lot cheaper in many cases to just leave the house alone, and build the garage separate.

I like having the garage separate from the house, but probably simply because that's what I'm used to. And, as I get older, I might find that I don't like it nearly so much!
 
I agree with OP. I don't like the houses where the garages take up most of the front view of the house. Better to have side load garage if you have a 3 or more car attached garage IMO. Side load garages require a wider or corner lot, so most garages face the front, and you end up what looks like a fire station.
 
What DW and I are noticing in our local neighborhood, modern architecture new builds seems to be more prevalent lately and looks totally out of place compared to typical DFW mega-mansions. I would expect to see these out in California on the coast. Not sure I like it.
 

Attachments

  • 20264078_3.jpg
    20264078_3.jpg
    83.2 KB · Views: 23
What DW and I are noticing in our local neighborhood, modern architecture new builds seems to be more prevalent lately and looks totally out of place compared to typical DFW mega-mansions. I would expect to see these out in California on the coast. Not sure I like it.

To me it looks like somebody took 3 or 4 1970's contemporary-style townhouses and shoved them all together. I don't care for it, just from that picture, but I might like it in person. And once I saw the inside of it, I might change my mind.

Back in 2016, I looked at this house, when it was on the market:
https://www.redfin.com/MD/Crownsville/1100-Opaca-Ct-21032/home/9927491
Looking at it now, and judging just from the pictures, from the front it does look like a jumbled mess. But at the time, seeing it in person, I didn't notice it. And I liked the house a lot. The main problems with it dealt with the land. It was on a pretty steep hill, and it would have been difficult to build more garage space. The garage itself was also a bit small. IIRC, a staircase came from the basement into the garage, and ate up some of the space in one of the bays. The driveway itself was long, on a steep slope, and also shared with a couple other houses. It was also shaded, so I could imagine it being a nightmare in the winter. Although in retrospect, we haven't had a decent snow storm around these parts since I looked at this house in 2016! I remember we got about 19" in 2016, but that was January, and it was summertime when I looked at this place.
 
Illiterates do it better.

And I’m sure that 2022 house won’t still be standing in 500 years.
 
If you watch House Hunters International, people often ask for European character. So they love things like beams in ceilings and arches and tile floors.

These features do look nice but I wonder about living in a home with exposed brick or unsealed stones.

For instance, is there more particulate from brick or stone suspended that dwellers inhale?

Do these more porous materials harbor mites or microbes?


BTW in that photo, looks like the roof on the old house is much more recent than 600 years old.
 
BTW in that photo, looks like the roof on the old house is much more recent than 600 years old.

I'm sure it is. I'm no construction guru but I'd think that even a slate roof has a hard time making it 600 years. Still, it's impressive that the structure has lasted that long. Not many do.
 
When I lived in a 1930 bungalow in the Midwest, my detached garage was on the alley at the back of the lot, as were all of the garages in the neighborhood. It gave the area a very tidy look from the streets. The only things I stored in the garage were gardening tools and supplies. Otherwise, every house had a basement and that's where all surplus household supplies were stored. I really liked the setup. My 2007 built house in TX also had an alley behind, so the garage was attached on the back of the house. That was also nice.
To my taste, the OP examples are unattractive, especially for the price point. But I do get a bit of pleasure from walking neighborhoods and critiquing the houses. The jumbled architecture that results from additions to older smaller houses can be especially gruesome! :ermm:
 
It is distressingly common here in Atlanta that nice solid older homes are purchased and bulldozed so that a McMansion can be built. Those are often almost the entire width of the lot. One solution for a garage is that they have a port cochere on one side of the house with a large detached garage behind. The garages usually have accessory dwelling space above.
 

Attachments

  • portcochere.jpg
    portcochere.jpg
    521.4 KB · Views: 21
It is distressingly common here in Atlanta that nice solid older homes are purchased and bulldozed so that a McMansion can be built. Those are often almost the entire width of the lot. One solution for a garage is that they have a port cochere on one side of the house with a large detached garage behind. The garages usually have accessory dwelling space above.

What a tremendous waste of space unless that has doors on either end so it can be closed off and used.
 
Back
Top Bottom