can someone help me identify what kind of style this house is? I've been looking and I can't seem to find anything that resembles it.
citizen
Nov 26, 23 1:23 am
No discernible (by me) style, just the end result of construction over a period of time. Lots (and lots!) of buildings can be characterized this way. It's not a slam, just an interpretation.
Josh Mings
Nov 26, 23 1:16 pm
There’s a little bit of 70s shed going on with the clerestory and mono roofs, but it’s completely obscured by that 2nd floor. Agreed that it’s just contractor/building designer making something up to sell
HouseQuestionForYou
Nov 26, 23 2:29 am
If it helps, it was built in 1990.
b3tadine[sutures]
Nov 26, 23 1:41 pm
Why is style important to you?
HouseQuestionForYou
Nov 26, 23 6:06 pm
I was just curious if it had a style that's all
Narciso Martinez
Nov 27, 23 1:25 pm
stucco modern
proto
Nov 29, 23 11:43 am
OP, my first reaction was this thread is a troll (I find it hard to consider anyone thinks this has a style, def not architects).
This house clearly doesn't have a style - it was built by someone who didn't even consider style. The roof dormer was stacked on the outside wall because it was easier structurally, and it maximized floor space. There are tiny and few windows, again indicating more interested in cheap before style. The trim at openings is flat casing without sills (cheap). Windows don't match. Minimal eaves. Plywood T-111 type siding (again cheap) & (if i'm not mistaken) the thinnest comp roofing available with a discontinuous gutter. Not to mention this is the front facade (by the house numbers on the trim?) despite looking like a back elevation of a cheap house.
Non Sequitur
Nov 26, 23 6:48 am
very few houses built in the last 40 years have a style. This one is no exception, it’s just typical cheap suburban sprawl.
gwharton
Nov 26, 23 8:14 am
Probably this...
HouseQuestionForYou
Nov 26, 23 12:27 pm
Unnecessary
citizen
Nov 26, 23 3:14 pm
Here at Archinect, we specialize in unnecessary... with varying degrees of politesse. Buckle up.
ill_will
Nov 29, 23 11:56 am
Why are you adding extra letters to the word *necessary* ?
gwharton
Nov 26, 23 8:15 am
Or maybe this...
mission_critical
Nov 26, 23 11:37 pm
Ah King County. That’ll be $2.5M please. You mentioned you build spec homes. Mind sharing some images? Im finding it difficult not to over spend for my location.
gwharton
Nov 27, 23 6:43 pm
That one's in Mason County, if you can believe it. I'll post a couple of work-in-progress home designs we have in the pipeline right now in a separate thread.
bennyc
Nov 26, 23 8:20 am
home depot post modern
JLC-1
Nov 26, 23 5:15 pm
that clerestory and the 12:12 pitch gives me nausea. I'd say it's "Fast Cabin with cheap additions" style based on past experiences.
Donna Sink
Nov 29, 23 7:55 am
I can’t believe it was built in 1990. Those clear story windows scream 1970s.
Also, to HouseQuestion OP: Search for any thread here, going back decades, when someone asks for help identifying a style and you will see that we mercilessly roast every single one of them. It's not personal, it's just fun for us. Unless it's truly a historically significant example, style isn't important, at all. It's a term real estate agents use to sound knowledgeable.
proto
Nov 29, 23 11:51 am
but if we're honest, most accompanying photos to these types of posts are not houses that were following a style in the first place
gwharton
Nov 29, 23 12:21 pm
proto - That's kind of the point of why the roasting happens. The reality is that 90%+ of homes built in the USA have never had an architect associated with their design at any point, and most of the design decision-making has not been organized around any kind of coherent principles. They are all a pastiche of various things thrown together ad hoc by people who are not prioritizing design quality. Hence "Contractor Traditional" and "Contractor Modern."
proto
Nov 29, 23 12:34 pm
Totally agree
Volunteer
Nov 29, 23 12:26 pm
This must be "Beat the Contractors Day". Ever wonder what contractors think of architects?
proto
Nov 29, 23 12:35 pm
no, they make it pretty clear
gwharton
Nov 29, 23 12:35 pm
I work closely with a bunch of them. I'm intimately familiar with what they think about architects. And they're usually more than justified in those opinions.
Volunteer
Nov 29, 23 12:38 pm
I recall a famous architect's design that was built in New England in the 1970s. It was on the cover of a popular magazine at the time. It fell apart after only a few years. A do-gooder group of architects enlisted a contractor for advice on saving this modern icon. He told them he could build it back exactly as it was according to plans but it would just as quickly fall apart again. He did not want the grief or the stain on his reputation.
Then we could visit "Brad Pitt and the Famous Architects Folly" in New Orleans but maybe that's to painful.
\
Wood Guy
Nov 30, 23 9:58 am
An architect friend of mine calls his style "carpenter modern." I use the term for this recent project of mine.
Wood Guy
Nov 30, 23 10:10 am
I meant to add that I see some resemblance with the OP's house.
can someone help me identify what kind of style this house is? I've been looking and I can't seem to find anything that resembles it.
No discernible (by me) style, just the end result of construction over a period of time. Lots (and lots!) of buildings can be characterized this way. It's not a slam, just an interpretation.
There’s a little bit of 70s shed going on with the clerestory and mono roofs, but it’s completely obscured by that 2nd floor. Agreed that it’s just contractor/building designer making something up to sell
If it helps, it was built in 1990.
Why is style important to you?
I was just curious if it had a style that's all
stucco modern
OP, my first reaction was this thread is a troll (I find it hard to consider anyone thinks this has a style, def not architects).
This house clearly doesn't have a style - it was built by someone who didn't even consider style. The roof dormer was stacked on the outside wall because it was easier structurally, and it maximized floor space. There are tiny and few windows, again indicating more interested in cheap before style. The trim at openings is flat casing without sills (cheap). Windows don't match. Minimal eaves. Plywood T-111 type siding (again cheap) & (if i'm not mistaken) the thinnest comp roofing available with a discontinuous gutter. Not to mention this is the front facade (by the house numbers on the trim?) despite looking like a back elevation of a cheap house.
very few houses built in the last 40 years have a style. This one is no exception, it’s just typical cheap suburban sprawl.
Probably this...
Unnecessary
Here at Archinect, we specialize in unnecessary... with varying degrees of politesse. Buckle up.
Why are you adding extra letters to the word *necessary* ?
Or maybe this...
Ah King County. That’ll be $2.5M please. You mentioned you build spec homes. Mind sharing some images? Im finding it difficult not to over spend for my location.
That one's in Mason County, if you can believe it. I'll post a couple of work-in-progress home designs we have in the pipeline right now in a separate thread.
home depot post modern
that clerestory and the 12:12 pitch gives me nausea. I'd say it's "Fast Cabin with cheap additions" style based on past experiences.
I can’t believe it was built in 1990. Those clear story windows scream 1970s.
but those home owners/slimy realtors deserved it.
Voice-to-text apparently doesn't recognize "clerestory" oops.
Also, to HouseQuestion OP: Search for any thread here, going back decades, when someone asks for help identifying a style and you will see that we mercilessly roast every single one of them. It's not personal, it's just fun for us. Unless it's truly a historically significant example, style isn't important, at all. It's a term real estate agents use to sound knowledgeable.
but if we're honest, most accompanying photos to these types of posts are not houses that were following a style in the first place
proto - That's kind of the point of why the roasting happens. The reality is that 90%+ of homes built in the USA have never had an architect associated with their design at any point, and most of the design decision-making has not been organized around any kind of coherent principles. They are all a pastiche of various things thrown together ad hoc by people who are not prioritizing design quality. Hence "Contractor Traditional" and "Contractor Modern."
Totally agree
This must be "Beat the Contractors Day". Ever wonder what contractors think of architects?
no, they make it pretty clear
I work closely with a bunch of them. I'm intimately familiar with what they think about architects. And they're usually more than justified in those opinions.
I recall a famous architect's design that was built in New England in the 1970s. It was on the cover of a popular magazine at the time. It fell apart after only a few years. A do-gooder group of architects enlisted a contractor for advice on saving this modern icon. He told them he could build it back exactly as it was according to plans but it would just as quickly fall apart again. He did not want the grief or the stain on his reputation. Then we could visit "Brad Pitt and the Famous Architects Folly" in New Orleans but maybe that's to painful. \
An architect friend of mine calls his style "carpenter modern." I use the term for this recent project of mine.
I meant to add that I see some resemblance with the OP's house.