I was about to link this to a friend, who has been using Wordpress and expressed interest in learning more about how websites work, and then OP got into installing a local Apache server and using LESS to compile CSS, and I'm afraid it might intimidate her, since she's already hesitant about her capacity for learning this sort of thing. I'm not sure why either was brought up though. If OP is comfortable with these tools and wanted to write about his own experience, I could understand, but for the sake of a tutorial, what benefit does adding these complications, which present a risk of alienating some segment of the tutorial's audience, provide? Unless you need a back end language, you don't need to install a local Apache server; you can run html files directly from whatever folder they're stored in, and if you link with relative paths, you can transfer the whole directory to a live server and it will still work fine, and for the amount of rules a beginner will probably write for a small, personal website, using LESS is probably overkill. Furthermore, anyone who's comfortable with either of these practices would have no problem adapting them to a basic "building a website with a grid framework" tutorial, and everyone else can pick them up later, when their value becomes more apparent.
It reminds me a little of the way every Javascript tutorial I find lately seems to assume that you're running a Node.js server. Outside of maybe the HN crowd, are most people running Node servers? I doubt it. And it's almost never necessary; you don't need Node to configure routing or build some custom directives in Angular, for example, so why insist that people use it?
Node provides some very handy tools for working locally. For example, usage of Bower, the client-side dependency, uses Node. Node also adds the ability to do nifty stuff like utilizing Livereload for automatically refreshing a page when you make an edit to a file.
I will admit, using all these tools was initially intimidating for me, but getting comfortable with them was extremely rewarding.
Oh, there's no question that local Apache and Node servers can be valuable tools, but if you're trying to teach your reader something that doesn't strictly require them, why risk alienating people who aren't familiar? How many people who just want to learn how two way binding works are going to see a Node.js server as a "requirement" and move on?
I agree this is a bit of overkill for a "my first hand-coded website" project. I've been hand-writing websites for over 15 years (back when all I had was Notepad on a Windoze box). I think I'd approach this sort of learning adventure more along these lines:
1. HTML/CSS (This is the end-result a browser needs, and you can write it all by hand yourself; by not using any grid/layout frameworks you'll learn all the fun things that CSS can do for you and you can focus on making clean semantic markup without any other dynamic distractions.)
2. Do some simple backend stuff that now dynamically generates the above HTML/CSS based on some simple logic (I'm thinking PHP to start because it's on almost every server already so you don't need to worry about installing anything... just get used to the idea of generating the above static HTML with some programming logic.)
3. Add a database (probably going to want to go with MySQL for the same reason as PHP; learn how to store data in the cloud and retrieve it to show in your dynamic pages)
4. Maybe learn some server config (probably Apache) but don't get too carried away because you can do a lot before you need to be installing Apache modules and tweaking environment variables... I'd just start by playing with redirects and error pages)
5. Now that you can build a full-stack website, I'd probably beef up my graphic design skills to make that shit sparkle (Usability, information hierarchy, and clear communication are the names of the game here. Design skills can make up for many technical difficulties if you think about the business problem you're trying to solve, not just how fancy you can make your sorting algorithm)
6. With the fundamentals under your belt, now I'd start looking into frameworks and libraries and helper tools that can make all of the above easier and faster. Now you'll understand what those tools are really doing for you and where they're appropriate to pull out. Get your CSS grid, your LESS compiler, your deployment tool, your database inspector, your autocompleting IDE (if that's what you're into) and make the computer do the grunt work, but now with the understanding of how it's helping you so that you can bend it to your will.
7. Move on to more advanced stuff like front-end MVC, non-blocking backend, websockets, streaming, ssl, localstorage, scaling optimizations, etc. But now that you can do the foundation yourself, you can add-on any of these advanced techniques as needed (no one in particular is absolutely necessary as they are specialized to particular tasks).
To me, this is the sort of DIY path that should be taken, step by step, to really understand how to construct a web property. IMHO the OP jumped into the deep-end a little too early. Learn to walk before you run ;)
It reminds me a little of the way every Javascript tutorial I find lately seems to assume that you're running a Node.js server. Outside of maybe the HN crowd, are most people running Node servers? I doubt it. And it's almost never necessary; you don't need Node to configure routing or build some custom directives in Angular, for example, so why insist that people use it?