Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tee hee. I've lived in apartments, rowhouses, ramblers, Colonials, and our "Craftsman-style" (concession to those who would brand it as "faux") house is far and away the most comfortable, enjoyable place I've ever lived, and not by a small margin.
Each to her own, I guess, though from all signs I have plenty of company.
That doesn't even make sense. A colonial can be the same exact size and layout as a craftsmans, it's just the decor.
True to some extent, although (1) I enjoy living in a house that isn't aiming to be a mini-replica of something you'd find in Williamsburg and (2) locally, it's the newer Colonials, not the Craftsman-style houses, that are more likely to have big center halls and two-story family rooms, neither of which I like. Our house has plenty of space, but it feels relaxed and informal.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I hope the trend of 5,500 sq ft monstrosities will one day be a thing of the past, and people will start wanting houses that merely meet their needs and have much less of an environmental impact. I'm probably delusional, though.
Ugh sorry for the triple post!![]()
Sorry hun it's not a trend
I don't mind larger houses if you need them for whatever reason, but I do not like 2-story foyers or 2-story great rooms. It just feels like too much wasted space to me. But I don't think they will go out of style or seem dated since having as grand a foyer or vestibule as possible was an aspiration since early times.
But no one NEEDS a house that large. They just don't!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tee hee. I've lived in apartments, rowhouses, ramblers, Colonials, and our "Craftsman-style" (concession to those who would brand it as "faux") house is far and away the most comfortable, enjoyable place I've ever lived, and not by a small margin.
Each to her own, I guess, though from all signs I have plenty of company.
That doesn't even make sense. A colonial can be the same exact size and layout as a craftsmans, it's just the decor.
Anonymous wrote:The kitchen in the middle of then living room.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It seems pretty wasteful to have a full bathroom in every single bedroom.
No one likes to share bathrooms. Admit that!
Anonymous wrote:they way they jump out and say "I'm craftsman and I'm cheap and good luck changing the façade with that great big porch!"
Anonymous wrote:Tee hee. I've lived in apartments, rowhouses, ramblers, Colonials, and our "Craftsman-style" (concession to those who would brand it as "faux") house is far and away the most comfortable, enjoyable place I've ever lived, and not by a small margin.
Each to her own, I guess, though from all signs I have plenty of company.
Anonymous wrote:The brick/stone veneer on the front and siding on all other sides is atrocious. Not specific to today's craftmans but that's a sure sign of mass produced housing.
Anonymous wrote:I hope the trend of 5,500 sq ft monstrosities will one day be a thing of the past, and people will start wanting houses that merely meet their needs and have much less of an environmental impact. I'm probably delusional, though.
Anonymous wrote:Wide plank Hardiplank on the ENTIRE house looks nice. It replicates the original wood panels exactly. There are restored homes from the 1920s (original wood) that look gorgeous.
It is the mixed media homes-- part brick or faux stone/rick mixed with Hardiplank that is bad.
Skinny aluminum siding is awful.