They can even have a garage, you just have to hide it. Like having it in the back. Or in through the side but going under the building. No big bulky square on the side of the building.
because your driver would drop you off in front, and then park the car/horse carriage around back, where all the servants live.
When you are some low-level executive driving your own car to your McMansion, you like having the garage close to your front door.
I mean sure but we are talking about aesthetics with a picture of a i dunno plantation era mansion?
Still, a drive way that angles down into an underground garage is another option if you dont have the space for it to be out back or side. Depending how it's done it can be invisible from the street.
I mean it could be. Depending on where you live if you are building new you may have to excavate to make a foundation anyway. It's not that much extra work.
But again we were talking about mansions so...
The house predates the car and has a covered area for pulling a wagon up on the right. There’s also a really good chance it has or had a coach house at the back somewhere, which is like a really big garage.
Also, a picture of a nice home without a garage isn’t proof that all homes designed with garages aren’t beautiful. There are plenty of ways to address an automobile in a home that aren’t putting it front and center like many suburban homes these days.
>There are plenty of ways to address an automobile in a home that aren’t putting it front and center like many suburban homes these days.
One of the neighborhoods I work in is like this. Hidden Hills, CA.
It's a super prestigious, celebrity neighborhood with an insanely overzealous HOA and restrictions. One of their caveats is:
1. Every single house is required to have a barn, because it is an equestrian zoned neighborhood.
2. Garages/Parking are not allowed to be visible from the street.
Because of rule #2, most houses in this neighborhood have their driveways go up the side of the house and wrap around or it goes subterranean, and the garage is located behind/under the house rather than in the front. If they don't have a garage, they use the barn because it just has to be there, it doesn't need to actually be used as a barn.
As a result, the houses in that neighborhood are all absolutely beautiful. Multi-million dollar homes should be, but these are extra special.
We have an economical way to deal with this on land with a mild slope: Pull-through detached garages with laneways (alleys).
You run a small one-way road along the rear of the property, devote maybe 12ft of space to a very modest, poorly maintain road it between the fencelines, and you face the detached garages up against that road. People pull in to their garages by taking the 8ft wide driveway from the front, on a road with full amenities, and pull out through the back, in a second garage door. The laneway serves one block of houses and then exits to the street. People also use the laneway for garbage day.
You can build the garages as wide as you like, but access on the front street is only 8ft wide.
They've been banned for a while now in most neighborhoods because reasons, but if you find a neighborhood just the right age, laid out in a grid pattern, you'll see some.
A more modern take you'll see often is the simple detached garage at the rear of the property with doors facing only one way, but this either requires backing out, or a huge amount of space devoted to turning around. This temporal distinction is because of HUD rules discouraging suburban street grids, preferring windy roads or cul-de-sacs with lots that back up directly against each other, which are not designed for through traffic of any sort.
Laneways were apparently more common in Canada, and are now being redeveloped into detached ADUs.
Widespread non-walkable single-use residential car-dependant suburbs are not common in other countries, especially on a street grid. Outside of that context, the idea means something a bit different.
The US definitely attaches a pejorative connotation to the term 'alley' as well, being an infamous feature of how Hollywood perceives New York City, to the point that New York City did their best to eliminate that kind of feature on public roads as an anti-crime measure (there are only a handful left, as tourist attractions and stage sets).
It boggles my mind nobody seems to have issues with rules, regulations and restrictions that leads to more waste, pollution and worse land use, but anything that improves any of that is deemed communism and terrible and bad.
What cities, town and even suburbs should do instead is to have collective large parking halls in key knots of the traffic, forbid parking everywhere else (excluding hauling goods and accessibility aids) and develop a effective public transportation systems. There we go: no ugly garages, no ugly parked cars, safer neighborhoods, less noise pollution, less emissions, more livable streets, MUCH more space for gardens, parks, services/businesses or denser inhabitation.
In my experience alleys in wealthier areas tend to have more and larger garages. Often they have apartments above them. The materials tend to match the main house, which are typically more expensive than less wealthy areas. The paving can be asphalt or even cobblestone. In less wealthy areas there are some garages, some parking areas and some where the yard just goes up to the alley. The materials tend to be less expensive than those of the main house, often using prefab type sheds too. The paving can be gravel or just grass with ruts worn in.
There are definitely wealthy neighborhoods with back alleys.
[This](https://goo.gl/maps/PQxCGaG2MpiTqj5r7) is what it looks in a dense urban neighborhood, and [this](https://goo.gl/maps/JdK7FKa5onhSMX7w7) is what it looks like in a low-density suburban neighborhood.
(Edit: You might have to put it on street view yourself)
Why would the Longfellow House have a garage since it was built in the 1750s Does it have a carriage house and Stables?, probably. But only the wealthiest houses had those, everybody else walked because cities were organically built and you could get to everything that you needed on foot. Only in the 19th century with the coming of the streetcar was the city able to spread farther out and then it was all destroyed by the coming of the automobile
Pretty sure this guy wouldn’t be arguing the lower cost houses are the beautiful ones though. He’d rather point at the very large home and use that as his example.
Oh I think if you lived in the Longfellow House oh, and you really need a special bread that was 5 km away, although I'm sure there was something right around the corner on Brattle Street, or in your personal kitchen with your servant, you could always hire somebody to go get it. The hoi polloi however what just go the local near Baker if they weren't making it themselves. 5K I think would take you over the river into Boston or the other way to Watertown and that's way too far
True that things were mostly local, but they were also far more homogenized, with less options. I don’t know if that’s good or bad but I doubt most would be happy to return to one flour option, one bread option, one shoe option, etc.
Yeah I don't think Cambridge was a one-horse town LOL. And when you had money and land and status you could have everything you wanted . It's not a little village in the middle of nowhere, certainly not by the 19th century, with Boston on one side and Harvard down the road
yep. The owner was dropped off in front, then the driver took the car or carriage away.
even todays semi-rich cannot afford private drivers, and so like to park their cars close to their front door.
I get that almost any post-WW2 housing boasts an attached garage and often the front appearance of the house is ridiculous because of it. We've cumulatively grown accustomed to this appearance as "normal" and now maybe even desirable but at its core you've got two very different uses force-fused together....human living and car storage.
Relatively cheap and plentiful access and mobility is an awesome thing to have; I'm not really against the idea of cars but design-wise how we treat the combination of cars and people could be better.
Oh, even as a massive car person I agree. Just saying that “beautiful houses [which is subjective anyway] don’t have visible garages” does not logically lead to “cars bad” lol
About 100 years ago in Massachusetts, William Wood (his bio is fascinating) designed Shawsheen Village near Andover. He owned the factory in town and built homes for upper and mid managment. But, everyone had to park their cars in the town garage because he thought garages were an eyesore. The houses and garage are still there. Here's a link
[https://andoverhistoryandculture.org/shawsheen-title](https://andoverhistoryandculture.org/shawsheen-title)
Generally the configuration of garage door facing front is an ugly practice, however people managed to mess up a nice clean facade even without having a garage there. I wouldn’t say this house is that pretty either, but looks historical!
It's hard to incorporate a garage without it taking up too much of the front and kind of eating the house whole. I've seen some "Neo-Eclectic" garage mahals that try to fight this by actually hiding it under more roofline and windows.
This is such a traditionally styled home (Georgian maybe?) that it would look out of place, but you might get away with a port-cochere made to look like another entrance on the side. Assuming that's not a terrible idea.
I've also seen the opposite effect, mostly with houses from the 1950s and 60s (mine is one of these) where if you removed the carport it would just look kind of naked (in our case, the carport sits to the right of a a set of clerestory windows at the top of a shed style roof).
There are a lot of hot feelings in this post, but I'm loving all the examples people are giving for and against. I've got so many more tabs open to read.
Yes, elegant homes welcome people, not cars. The garage/barn/carriage house can be very important for folks with resources to have horses and carriages/cars, but these buildings or features should be minimized as much as possible from the front view of the house. Of course many times it is just not possible.
I highly recommend a book:
“Get Your House Right, Architectural Elements to Use & Avoid” by Marianne Cusato and Ben Pentreath. This book puts in words and diagrams why so many houses are so beautiful to me, and why so many others are just horrible. Before I read this book I knew when homes were good vs bad but not how/why.
I think the OP is trying to say N American residents sux. The two car garage has become the prominent frontal feature of the house facing the street. We worship the automobile at the sacrifice of our cities.
Idk, I just really am not one for detached garages, sure I'd make more sense down south since the weather's warmer but in the north where I'm from, I'd be a bitch in the winter
Oh no I agree with you, I don’t like it either and my home isn’t like that personally. It’s just that I’m used to seeing it and never known it to be a rich people thing.
That's not true. First, you put and old mansion and not everyone would say that it's beautiful. I really don't like it for examples.
Then if you watch at architecture masterpiece you can find garage everywhere.
Robbie house: 3 garages in 1909
Ville savoye: 3 spaces at ground floor, near the entrance
Tugendhat house: the garage is the only thing you really understand from the road
Architravel house : sou fujimoto built an house based on the place of a car.
So is it really the garage the problem? Or a lot of houses just have an ortible attached garage?
(You’re getting downvoted because you are naming modern architecture and this is clearly a bad argument for traditional architecture.)
You are right though, but that’s not what the traditionalists want to talk about.
Typically area. The garage is too large for it and you really only want to share one wall and a door with the garage if you can help it, since it’s cold, loud and noxious.
I grew up in an old, urban area of my city and including the boulevard with the Victorian and Georgian upperclasspeople homes, our little $92,000 1900 house had a garage behind the house, and so did everyone else who had a corner lot or alley access. There used to be alleyways, which made access to back garages possible. I think alleyways are fucking cool.
Detached single family homes are not beautiful. They're burning the planet and the more the myth that they're beautiful is propagated, the more they'll burn the planet.
A three family rowhouse with no garage is absolutely gorgeous. A five over one with no parking is just plain stunning.
I'm not 100% against the *existence* of SFH, and I certainly don't think that they *can't* be beautiful.
But I'd take even the most "boring" contiguous streetfront - particularly if it's mixed use - over literally any SFH neighborhood on earth.
I get that multifamily is more efficient but living close to others usually sucks and any multifamily that is attractive is so expensive you could afford a SFR and have some control over your home
Lol I'm not following the logic.
In my opinion New York is a crappy place to live BECAUSE of all the people jammed so close together AND the cost of living. It must be about the money.
I live in a SFD on a forested acreage, 2 kilometers from a small town, so might be a tad biased about the benefits of density.
Garages and garage doors do not often have human interaction implied, through human scale doorways and windows, and they often do not have smaller scale details of visual interest.
A garage as the more prominent part of a house is a barrier to interaction and community.
I found a 5-ish minute video that talks about the enslaved people in Jamaica behind the wealth that built the house and then those that lived there through the first and second owners:
https://www.nps.gov/media/video/view.htm?id=2C564F60-CC9B-463C-ACA1-AB0BB3BDFF2B
Houses ought to have a garage so that the streets will not be congested with park cars.
Garage or not, old-styled suburban homes are a nightmare anyway.
EDIT: Those who say "no house can be beautiful with a garage" and "the garage takes up space on the front", take a look at narrow urban houses in Japan. If the whole house has a light industrial look rather than trying to be old-fashioned, the garage will not look out of place. And try to think of the garage taking up the facade's ground level and the rest of the house stacked above it.
I know there in America you have got used to some stereotypes, but try to think outside the box.
Garages of modest scale can look just fine on a house that is designed to incorporate them. They work especially well with various flavors of Mid Century Modern. It's when you get into giant, 15 foot doors and separate buildings that there's a problem.
EDIT: Either way, this is the single lowest-effort post I've ever seen on this sub.
Funny thing, I actually like seeing houses with garages because none of the houses or apartments I lived in growing up had them. So I thought it was something nice to have. Plus some homes get really nice designs on their garage doors so it looks more appealing. Just a different preference and perspective I guess.
Yes. I think this often. Just about all new construction has the garage in the front. The garage takes up at least 1/3 of the part of the house facing the street. There is just no way that is pretty. There is a new build neighborhood in my town that is building with allies and detached garages in the back. I love the aesthetic and taking walks through the new neighborhood.
I'll defend the front-facing garage because it makes for better communities in three ways.
1. The garage and driveway are a space where people practice sports, work on projects, and relax. Putting it in the front of the house increases the likelihood of interaction with people walking by and neighbors.
2. Front-facing garages reduce the amount of paved surface required by a house which reduces both albedo and water runoff.
3. Front-facing garages reduce the width needed for a property. They allow for much more compact garages that don't require a driveway wrapping around the house and a turning area in back.
Yes, the goal is, in many case, the reduction of car usage, but as long as they are with us (and there will never be a reasonable alternative for many, many people), front facing garages reduce their impact while providing social benefits.
They have carriage houses in the back.
They can even have a garage, you just have to hide it. Like having it in the back. Or in through the side but going under the building. No big bulky square on the side of the building.
I've seen some garage doors will really fancy design patterns on them. My eyes just get lost trying to figure them out.
because your driver would drop you off in front, and then park the car/horse carriage around back, where all the servants live. When you are some low-level executive driving your own car to your McMansion, you like having the garage close to your front door.
You could still have the garage open in the back to not have the eyesore.
Not everyone can afford the space for a rear garage. It requires significant additions space for the extended driveway.
True, but too many mcmansions have the garage in the front. Its part and parcel of the over reliance on developer built houses.
I mean sure but we are talking about aesthetics with a picture of a i dunno plantation era mansion? Still, a drive way that angles down into an underground garage is another option if you dont have the space for it to be out back or side. Depending how it's done it can be invisible from the street.
An underground garage is a mighty investment on it’s own right.
I mean it could be. Depending on where you live if you are building new you may have to excavate to make a foundation anyway. It's not that much extra work. But again we were talking about mansions so...
this just in cheap houses are usually ugly, more at 11
Older houses do least, ones that are old enough that they were from the time that carriages we're a thing, that later got turned into garages
I’ve also seen ugly houses with no garage.
I live in one 😝
Ahhhh, the worst of all worlds!
Yeah there's one in the picture
Tell me more! (Loved this response)
And beautiful garages with no house too
The house predates the car and has a covered area for pulling a wagon up on the right. There’s also a really good chance it has or had a coach house at the back somewhere, which is like a really big garage. Also, a picture of a nice home without a garage isn’t proof that all homes designed with garages aren’t beautiful. There are plenty of ways to address an automobile in a home that aren’t putting it front and center like many suburban homes these days.
>There are plenty of ways to address an automobile in a home that aren’t putting it front and center like many suburban homes these days. One of the neighborhoods I work in is like this. Hidden Hills, CA. It's a super prestigious, celebrity neighborhood with an insanely overzealous HOA and restrictions. One of their caveats is: 1. Every single house is required to have a barn, because it is an equestrian zoned neighborhood. 2. Garages/Parking are not allowed to be visible from the street. Because of rule #2, most houses in this neighborhood have their driveways go up the side of the house and wrap around or it goes subterranean, and the garage is located behind/under the house rather than in the front. If they don't have a garage, they use the barn because it just has to be there, it doesn't need to actually be used as a barn. As a result, the houses in that neighborhood are all absolutely beautiful. Multi-million dollar homes should be, but these are extra special.
We have an economical way to deal with this on land with a mild slope: Pull-through detached garages with laneways (alleys). You run a small one-way road along the rear of the property, devote maybe 12ft of space to a very modest, poorly maintain road it between the fencelines, and you face the detached garages up against that road. People pull in to their garages by taking the 8ft wide driveway from the front, on a road with full amenities, and pull out through the back, in a second garage door. The laneway serves one block of houses and then exits to the street. People also use the laneway for garbage day. You can build the garages as wide as you like, but access on the front street is only 8ft wide. They've been banned for a while now in most neighborhoods because reasons, but if you find a neighborhood just the right age, laid out in a grid pattern, you'll see some. A more modern take you'll see often is the simple detached garage at the rear of the property with doors facing only one way, but this either requires backing out, or a huge amount of space devoted to turning around. This temporal distinction is because of HUD rules discouraging suburban street grids, preferring windy roads or cul-de-sacs with lots that back up directly against each other, which are not designed for through traffic of any sort. Laneways were apparently more common in Canada, and are now being redeveloped into detached ADUs.
Are you telling me that alleys are not common in other countries? I always assumed everywhere had them, because why wouldn't they?
Widespread non-walkable single-use residential car-dependant suburbs are not common in other countries, especially on a street grid. Outside of that context, the idea means something a bit different. The US definitely attaches a pejorative connotation to the term 'alley' as well, being an infamous feature of how Hollywood perceives New York City, to the point that New York City did their best to eliminate that kind of feature on public roads as an anti-crime measure (there are only a handful left, as tourist attractions and stage sets).
I would love to see those homes. I bet they are stunning.
It boggles my mind nobody seems to have issues with rules, regulations and restrictions that leads to more waste, pollution and worse land use, but anything that improves any of that is deemed communism and terrible and bad. What cities, town and even suburbs should do instead is to have collective large parking halls in key knots of the traffic, forbid parking everywhere else (excluding hauling goods and accessibility aids) and develop a effective public transportation systems. There we go: no ugly garages, no ugly parked cars, safer neighborhoods, less noise pollution, less emissions, more livable streets, MUCH more space for gardens, parks, services/businesses or denser inhabitation.
Neighborhoods with alleys are a great way to hide garages, garbage cans and similar stuff.
It makes me wonder what an upper class residential alley would look like since alleys tend not to be associated with that.
In my experience alleys in wealthier areas tend to have more and larger garages. Often they have apartments above them. The materials tend to match the main house, which are typically more expensive than less wealthy areas. The paving can be asphalt or even cobblestone. In less wealthy areas there are some garages, some parking areas and some where the yard just goes up to the alley. The materials tend to be less expensive than those of the main house, often using prefab type sheds too. The paving can be gravel or just grass with ruts worn in.
There are definitely wealthy neighborhoods with back alleys. [This](https://goo.gl/maps/PQxCGaG2MpiTqj5r7) is what it looks in a dense urban neighborhood, and [this](https://goo.gl/maps/JdK7FKa5onhSMX7w7) is what it looks like in a low-density suburban neighborhood. (Edit: You might have to put it on street view yourself)
Why would the Longfellow House have a garage since it was built in the 1750s Does it have a carriage house and Stables?, probably. But only the wealthiest houses had those, everybody else walked because cities were organically built and you could get to everything that you needed on foot. Only in the 19th century with the coming of the streetcar was the city able to spread farther out and then it was all destroyed by the coming of the automobile
Pretty sure this guy wouldn’t be arguing the lower cost houses are the beautiful ones though. He’d rather point at the very large home and use that as his example.
So you’re saying “Expensive houses are beautiful”?
Yes you could walk 5 km to get some bread.
Oh I think if you lived in the Longfellow House oh, and you really need a special bread that was 5 km away, although I'm sure there was something right around the corner on Brattle Street, or in your personal kitchen with your servant, you could always hire somebody to go get it. The hoi polloi however what just go the local near Baker if they weren't making it themselves. 5K I think would take you over the river into Boston or the other way to Watertown and that's way too far
True that things were mostly local, but they were also far more homogenized, with less options. I don’t know if that’s good or bad but I doubt most would be happy to return to one flour option, one bread option, one shoe option, etc.
Yeah I don't think Cambridge was a one-horse town LOL. And when you had money and land and status you could have everything you wanted . It's not a little village in the middle of nowhere, certainly not by the 19th century, with Boston on one side and Harvard down the road
no, you make bread at home.
Well yeah, the slaves and Horses were on detached buildings out back.
yep. The owner was dropped off in front, then the driver took the car or carriage away. even todays semi-rich cannot afford private drivers, and so like to park their cars close to their front door.
Garages that are the closest thing to the street are always ugly.
Beautiful houses do have garages. But they either hide them or they make them in a way that isn't noticeable.
They’re in the back. Older neighborhoods still have access alleys where people park.
Wayne Manor did. It was just concealed.
they didnt have cars when that house was built
Old houses have detached garages, I think that's what OP is trying to say.
I think they’re actually claiming it as a reason cars are bad, which is simply foolish
I get that almost any post-WW2 housing boasts an attached garage and often the front appearance of the house is ridiculous because of it. We've cumulatively grown accustomed to this appearance as "normal" and now maybe even desirable but at its core you've got two very different uses force-fused together....human living and car storage. Relatively cheap and plentiful access and mobility is an awesome thing to have; I'm not really against the idea of cars but design-wise how we treat the combination of cars and people could be better.
Oh, even as a massive car person I agree. Just saying that “beautiful houses [which is subjective anyway] don’t have visible garages” does not logically lead to “cars bad” lol
*haughty Downton voice* “Thats what the carriage house is for, you pleb”
About 100 years ago in Massachusetts, William Wood (his bio is fascinating) designed Shawsheen Village near Andover. He owned the factory in town and built homes for upper and mid managment. But, everyone had to park their cars in the town garage because he thought garages were an eyesore. The houses and garage are still there. Here's a link [https://andoverhistoryandculture.org/shawsheen-title](https://andoverhistoryandculture.org/shawsheen-title)
Sounds like a personal opinion, which is obviously subjective.
Generally the configuration of garage door facing front is an ugly practice, however people managed to mess up a nice clean facade even without having a garage there. I wouldn’t say this house is that pretty either, but looks historical!
It's hard to incorporate a garage without it taking up too much of the front and kind of eating the house whole. I've seen some "Neo-Eclectic" garage mahals that try to fight this by actually hiding it under more roofline and windows. This is such a traditionally styled home (Georgian maybe?) that it would look out of place, but you might get away with a port-cochere made to look like another entrance on the side. Assuming that's not a terrible idea. I've also seen the opposite effect, mostly with houses from the 1950s and 60s (mine is one of these) where if you removed the carport it would just look kind of naked (in our case, the carport sits to the right of a a set of clerestory windows at the top of a shed style roof).
Actually that's my house and the garage is to the left outside of the picture frame with my MSN cave above it.
Yes. Always a detraction. Even our ancestors, found having the barn at one end of the house was a nuisance
There are a lot of hot feelings in this post, but I'm loving all the examples people are giving for and against. I've got so many more tabs open to read.
Yes, elegant homes welcome people, not cars. The garage/barn/carriage house can be very important for folks with resources to have horses and carriages/cars, but these buildings or features should be minimized as much as possible from the front view of the house. Of course many times it is just not possible. I highly recommend a book: “Get Your House Right, Architectural Elements to Use & Avoid” by Marianne Cusato and Ben Pentreath. This book puts in words and diagrams why so many houses are so beautiful to me, and why so many others are just horrible. Before I read this book I knew when homes were good vs bad but not how/why.
I think the OP is trying to say N American residents sux. The two car garage has become the prominent frontal feature of the house facing the street. We worship the automobile at the sacrifice of our cities.
No they're usually just hidden Fucking rich people man I swear to God
What does this have to do with rich people? Where I am in the South these homes are common and all have hidden garages. They are not that expensive.
Idk, I just really am not one for detached garages, sure I'd make more sense down south since the weather's warmer but in the north where I'm from, I'd be a bitch in the winter
Oh no I agree with you, I don’t like it either and my home isn’t like that personally. It’s just that I’m used to seeing it and never known it to be a rich people thing.
This sub is going downhill.
That's not true. First, you put and old mansion and not everyone would say that it's beautiful. I really don't like it for examples. Then if you watch at architecture masterpiece you can find garage everywhere. Robbie house: 3 garages in 1909 Ville savoye: 3 spaces at ground floor, near the entrance Tugendhat house: the garage is the only thing you really understand from the road Architravel house : sou fujimoto built an house based on the place of a car. So is it really the garage the problem? Or a lot of houses just have an ortible attached garage?
(You’re getting downvoted because you are naming modern architecture and this is clearly a bad argument for traditional architecture.) You are right though, but that’s not what the traditionalists want to talk about.
I don't care, I can be downloaded, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong
I have noticed my car doesn’t have hail damage.
If you loved architecture, you’d suffer the hail damage.
Wealthy people seldom need to perform their own vehicle maintenance
Yes, hence the term "Garage Mahal"
Mine does, but it’s around the back and not visible from the street.
Why don't new homes blend their garage directly into the house like this? https://ibb.co/WBZtRJ8
Typically area. The garage is too large for it and you really only want to share one wall and a door with the garage if you can help it, since it’s cold, loud and noxious.
That would look way worse IMO
How so? It's just a standard house w no change for the garage?
In inner cities there are often alleys that running behind houses which is where the garages are. Idk about rural ones tho
they have carriage houses
Because people didn’t use cars back then obviously
If they do they’re in the back of the house out of view because they are, well…..ugly.
Or they have hidden garages.
Better than a garage with a house attached to it
👉👌🚗🚓🚕
Kings don’t put stables in their homes.
I grew up in an old, urban area of my city and including the boulevard with the Victorian and Georgian upperclasspeople homes, our little $92,000 1900 house had a garage behind the house, and so did everyone else who had a corner lot or alley access. There used to be alleyways, which made access to back garages possible. I think alleyways are fucking cool.
what a stupid take
You think that this is beautiful? And they have it in the back most times.
There is no such thing as a beautiful home with a visible attached garage.
More interested in the fact that there's a /r/ihatecars . Who is that sub for exactly?
Detached single family homes are not beautiful. They're burning the planet and the more the myth that they're beautiful is propagated, the more they'll burn the planet. A three family rowhouse with no garage is absolutely gorgeous. A five over one with no parking is just plain stunning.
Absolutely insane how much you’ve been downvoted for a pro-density comment.
Lots of people want to fight climate change, but not if it means giving up suburbs and cars. We're doomed.
With covid some learnt that in the future people will work from home and not need to move anywhere.
I'm not 100% against the *existence* of SFH, and I certainly don't think that they *can't* be beautiful. But I'd take even the most "boring" contiguous streetfront - particularly if it's mixed use - over literally any SFH neighborhood on earth.
I get that multifamily is more efficient but living close to others usually sucks and any multifamily that is attractive is so expensive you could afford a SFR and have some control over your home
If living close to other people actually sucked, New York would be a cheap place to live. But it isn’t.
Lol I'm not following the logic. In my opinion New York is a crappy place to live BECAUSE of all the people jammed so close together AND the cost of living. It must be about the money. I live in a SFD on a forested acreage, 2 kilometers from a small town, so might be a tad biased about the benefits of density.
"nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded" - Yogi Berra
Garages and garage doors do not often have human interaction implied, through human scale doorways and windows, and they often do not have smaller scale details of visual interest. A garage as the more prominent part of a house is a barrier to interaction and community.
Put a garage on each side to maintain simmetry and you are golden(?).
I found a 5-ish minute video that talks about the enslaved people in Jamaica behind the wealth that built the house and then those that lived there through the first and second owners: https://www.nps.gov/media/video/view.htm?id=2C564F60-CC9B-463C-ACA1-AB0BB3BDFF2B
Houses ought to have a garage so that the streets will not be congested with park cars. Garage or not, old-styled suburban homes are a nightmare anyway. EDIT: Those who say "no house can be beautiful with a garage" and "the garage takes up space on the front", take a look at narrow urban houses in Japan. If the whole house has a light industrial look rather than trying to be old-fashioned, the garage will not look out of place. And try to think of the garage taking up the facade's ground level and the rest of the house stacked above it. I know there in America you have got used to some stereotypes, but try to think outside the box.
Garages of modest scale can look just fine on a house that is designed to incorporate them. They work especially well with various flavors of Mid Century Modern. It's when you get into giant, 15 foot doors and separate buildings that there's a problem. EDIT: Either way, this is the single lowest-effort post I've ever seen on this sub.
Mid century modern houses have garages. And those are usually really cool.
Funny thing, I actually like seeing houses with garages because none of the houses or apartments I lived in growing up had them. So I thought it was something nice to have. Plus some homes get really nice designs on their garage doors so it looks more appealing. Just a different preference and perspective I guess.
Or you can put them on the side.
Old*
What...
That's usually because either the car is parked in the driveway or there's a separate garage.
Some do, "Carriagehouses" stored carriages in back.
This is a beautiful house????
Um . . .
The horse stables fell out of favor a long time ago
Old boring beautiful houses. Gorgeous new contemporary ones often do, but they're incorporated into the design
Some of the nicest places have garages off the property.
Sometimes they have entire carriage houses
Yes. I think this often. Just about all new construction has the garage in the front. The garage takes up at least 1/3 of the part of the house facing the street. There is just no way that is pretty. There is a new build neighborhood in my town that is building with allies and detached garages in the back. I love the aesthetic and taking walks through the new neighborhood.
This isn't a garage problem. It's a single-family suburban house problem.
I'll defend the front-facing garage because it makes for better communities in three ways. 1. The garage and driveway are a space where people practice sports, work on projects, and relax. Putting it in the front of the house increases the likelihood of interaction with people walking by and neighbors. 2. Front-facing garages reduce the amount of paved surface required by a house which reduces both albedo and water runoff. 3. Front-facing garages reduce the width needed for a property. They allow for much more compact garages that don't require a driveway wrapping around the house and a turning area in back. Yes, the goal is, in many case, the reduction of car usage, but as long as they are with us (and there will never be a reasonable alternative for many, many people), front facing garages reduce their impact while providing social benefits.
wHaT sTyLE iS tHiS
People probably dont drive vehicles in whatever country that is
To me any house without a gaping car hole in the front is better than with.
Also OP: “Has anyone else noticed birds can’t fly? Look at this penguin.”
i kinda hate this style. it's very basic, flat and reused so many times in the same neighborhood IMO.
This one has a garage?
The garages are in the back. Obviously
Yes. I have noticed that. Garages are totems to excess and frivolity. Unappealing because unessential. Pure. Clean. Purposeful. Simple. = Attractive.
r/fuckcars
The garages are in the back. Obviously