Anonymous wrote:http://www.bungalowhomesllc.com/

While these aren't perfect replicas of true bungalows, at least they tried with some of the interior detailing. Also, it says they collaborate with The Bungalow Company which isn't as frowned upon by bungalow purists as the average builder creations.

http://www.bungalowcompany.com/index.php

I'm sure that the builders who follow that aesthetic promote their purism and claim their houses will hold up better than their competitors. Whether that turns out to be the case remains to be seen.

A home built by Steve Bukont or JP Brehony will hold up well compared to anything built over the past 50 years.

Not so sure about the last three houses.

I'm really interested to see how new houses like the ones OP linked to hold up over time. Perhaps they will be fine, perhaps not. They look nice, but, to my untrained eye, just don't appear to be built to last well for decades.

I want to put up my Queen Anne with a belfry and lots of cats. Why can't guys have lots of cats?

Sadly, all I could afford was something in the middle of Winchester, Leesburg, or Front Royal. But the cats I could afford.

http://www.bungalowhomesllc.com/

While these aren't perfect replicas of true bungalows, at least they tried with some of the interior detailing. Also, it says they collaborate with The Bungalow Company which isn't as frowned upon by bungalow purists as the average builder creations.

http://www.bungalowcompany.com/index.php

The reason the houses are relatively huge comes down to simple economics. The land is worth between $350,000 - $500,000 per lot in Vienna - no matter what you put on it. A house costs about $250,000 to build, if that. It doesn't matter if its 2,000 or 4,000 SF, the cost difference to build it is not that different. However, once constructed, the 4,000 SF house can be sold for $1.1 - $1.4 million, and appeals to families needing 4-5 bedrooms. The smaller house can only be sold for around $800,0000-$900,000, and has a smaller pool of buyers. Which would you build?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like arts and crafts/bungalow houses. Those houses are what happens when a developer tries to mimic a trend, but doesn't want to give up square footage. They took a bungalow and stuck a McMansion second floor on the top. The proportions are all wrong (imho for all of them, not just the second list).

A purist might prefer a 1920s Sears bungalow in Del Ray or Kensington (the McHouse of its era) to all of these houses, but they appeal to a niche market. Most modern families want more space. That's why there's been such an active market for the larger Craftsman houses in Bethesda-Chevy Chase, Arlington, McLean and Vienna in recent years.

The problem is that these houses aren't really "craftsman" homes. The builders are just using exactly the same floorplans they were using five years ago and slapping craftsman-style trim on the outside. There's a way to expand the traditional bungalow into a larger house and still keep the spiritnofmthe style. I've seen them. They just haven't even tried that here.

Roi always sucks with reno compared to tear down

Anonymous wrote:

The problem is that these houses aren't really "craftsman" homes. The builders are just using exactly the same floorplans they were using five years ago and slapping craftsman-style trim on the outside. There's a way to expand the traditional bungalow into a larger house and still keep the spiritnofmthe style. I've seen them. They just haven't even tried that here.

It may be a problem for you, but not the people who live in the homes. It's not like a French cheese that has to be made a certain way to be called Camembert.

Personally, I love the first wave of Craftsman-style homes that sprouted up in Vienna, but agree that the more recent knock-offs are bland. But, again, what I find bland others may consider the realization of a long-held ambition.

I didn't look at the interior pictures, but all those houses look the same from the outside. So, I guess Vienna will eventually have the new upgraded homogenous look.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like arts and crafts/bungalow houses. Those houses are what happens when a developer tries to mimic a trend, but doesn't want to give up square footage. They took a bungalow and stuck a McMansion second floor on the top. The proportions are all wrong (imho for all of them, not just the second list).

A purist might prefer a 1920s Sears bungalow in Del Ray or Kensington (the McHouse of its era) to all of these houses, but they appeal to a niche market. Most modern families want more space. That's why there's been such an active market for the larger Craftsman houses in Bethesda-Chevy Chase, Arlington, McLean and Vienna in recent years.

The problem is that these houses aren't really "craftsman" homes. The builders are just using exactly the same floorplans they were using five years ago and slapping craftsman-style trim on the outside. There's a way to expand the traditional bungalow into a larger house and still keep the spiritnofmthe style. I've seen them. They just haven't even tried that here.

Anonymous wrote:

I've lived in both cities now and while the enormity of the houses is more obvious in Arlington, the average new home in Vienna is still seems grossly oversized to me.

Sounds like you should have lived in Midgetville while you still had a chance. It's too late now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A truly intelligent builder would build a Craftsman or Colonial style house with square footage somewhere between 1915 and 2005. "But people want big!" all of them? Surely there are other people like my husband andme who wouldn't mind a new house that isn't the Goodyear blimp of lot eating houses. Mickey Simpson, I'm looking at you!

It's more of an issue in Arlington, where the lots are so small. You can have a bigger house on a larger lot in Bethesda or McLean and still have a reasonable back yard.

Don't know about Mickey Simpson, but Tradition Homes seems to be gravitating towards bigger houses these days, not smaller ones. Sounds like you need a custom builder and a custom home.

I've lived in both cities now and while the enormity of the houses is more obvious in Arlington, the average new home in Vienna is still seems grossly oversized to me.

Not everyone in the world commutes to DC believe it or not; lots of people who work in Tysons favor Vienna. It is true that a lot of the infill are in neighborhoods with older, post-WWII GI-housing stock that are mainly either owned by old people or (gasp!) rented by working-class people. Some of us think this is why Vienna is awesome.

The recession affects what builders will build. They look very cheaply made, i.e., cheap materials, no extra frills.

Anonymous wrote:A truly intelligent builder would build a Craftsman or Colonial style house with square footage somewhere between 1915 and 2005. "But people want big!" all of them? Surely there are other people like my husband andme who wouldn't mind a new house that isn't the Goodyear blimp of lot eating houses. Mickey Simpson, I'm looking at you!

It's more of an issue in Arlington, where the lots are so small. You can have a bigger house on a larger lot in Bethesda or McLean and still have a reasonable back yard.

Don't know about Mickey Simpson, but Tradition Homes seems to be gravitating towards bigger houses these days, not smaller ones. Sounds like you need a custom builder and a custom home.