View Full Version : Narooma Residence
I NEVER DO HOUSES!!!!!
But this one I just have to!
This block has 20 metres rise from road level to the rear boundary. I haven't done much on it other than a quick siting, working out how many steps needed to get to the front door and a quick check on massing v's maximum building envelope impossed by the local regs.
The major considerations to this design is:
1. Avoid excessive excavation into rock (less than 500mm below NS),
2. Maintain economy throughout,
3. Maintain height envelope,
4. Bushfire risks,
5. Access southern outlook and views,
6. Construction / crane limitations,
7. Maintain good sub floor access for pest / termite inspection.
So the answer to the big question is 55 STEPS, WOW! :eek:
Southern Elevation of study
Western Elevation of the study
Aerial view.
As shown the proposal incorporates a studio to the foreground (separate access), centre - living / dining / kitchen, rear bedrooms / service areas.
The foreground studio is positioned thus and the undercroft built in to visually screen the underfloor of the elevated areas to the rear.
View from street.
And of course those stairs............................................ .............55!!!
primocordara
17-08-2005, 19:45
Well, nice to get up in the morning and go down for the newspaper and milk!
(When back at 6am i'd just sleep on the steps!)
Seriously, is there no way to access from uphill, take the car up at least?
Wow - what a site!!
You've probably seen Peter Stutchbury's Israel House. Not on the same scale as yours but interesting approach to a really steep site.
http://www.arch.adelaide.edu.au/gallery/lighthouse/isreal%20house/
like what you've done so far..............awaiting the development
Ah and a plan view, the minor excavation to the street frontage to which the carport is designated is existing and was done as part of the works of the original subdivision.
Sh*t,,, sorry mate to hijack your thread midpost.. - didn't realise you were still posting. btw. the studio bit at the bottom of your site reminded me of the Isreal house location.
cobberman
17-08-2005, 19:52
55 stairs is not something I would like to live in. While the house area seems interesting the trip would not. What about an alternative to stairs. Check out this thread (http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=185&highlight=incline) it might be able to help you.
imasayer
17-08-2005, 19:52
Looking at this I would say that you should do more houses, this is fabulous. Has the client accepted this proposal? There are a lot of stairs, but who cares? I think it would be a great way to experience this site. I love it. I think that the clustered massing works really well and keeps the scale reasonable. I am just waiting for more info!
Well, nice to get up in the morning and go down for the newspaper and milk!
(When back at 6am i'd just sleep on the steps!)
Seriously, is there no way to access from uphill, take the car up at least?
I WISH!
Mate it is so steep when you walk down at the moment for the last 20m you do it with ya bum on the ground, seriously! I'm a climber my fear for those things isn't too bad but and as the rocky surface is a bit loose I shit myself.
imasayer
17-08-2005, 19:58
55 stairs is not something I would like to live in. While the house area seems interesting the trip would not. What about an alternative to stairs. Check out this thread (http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=185&highlight=incline) it might be able to help you.
Ok, jury is still out on the stairs. I think we need to understand the program of the studio a little better. If it is my primary work environment, 55 stairs is a short commute.
Nice project Richard :not worth
But where are those wonderful Microsoft Word plans and sections? :cool:
Sh*t,,, sorry mate to hijack your thread midpost.. - didn't realise you were still posting. btw. the studio bit at the bottom of your site reminded me of the Isreal house location.
Your welcome mate, I hadn't seen the design you posted, but certainly interesting, reminds me of an article I saw once of a design where the client told the Architect he wanted something more like camping, I'll try and dig the article out and post details. It was amazing what they had done in the space of your average garden shed.
55 stairs is not something I would like to live in. While the house area seems interesting the trip would not. What about an alternative to stairs. Check out this thread (http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=185&highlight=incline) it might be able to help you.
Cobbs, an inclinator is certainly something to be considered, possibly later though. I did a design for the installation of one on a previous project before the earth cooled, one of the difficulties with this site is the changing grade. The rail can only afford a maximum change in grade of 10 deg or the cost rockets.
Cheers mate, Richard
WilsonMetry
17-08-2005, 20:11
Richard,
Love the plan. The two upper orthogonal masses and then the rational turn of the lower block. Simple and effective.
Curious if moving the entire house down the hill and stretching it out a bit to make the climb more eventful. Stop at the bar along the way :cheers:
Looking at this I would say that you should do more houses, this is fabulous. Has the client accepted this proposal? There are a lot of stairs, but who cares? I think it would be a great way to experience this site. I love it. I think that the clustered massing works really well and keeps the scale reasonable. I am just waiting for more info!
Thanks mate, I don't have much more info at this stage, only just started the planning.
In this case I am the client, I bought this block about 20 years ago and I've only stepped on it once. Just decided now I should get around to doing something with it. Hence in part the reason for keeping the costs down and not making too great a statement as I dont want to hang on to it for long.
Its funny how the market demands only unique homes if designed for them, they truely do not want to invest in someone elses dream. Unless of course the unique home is afforded a unique location.
The studio is for my work (well if it is ever built) but would also serve as a mutli function room for a family. I have not proposed internal access from this space to the rest of the dwelling due to the additional cost of space.
Richard,
Love the plan. The two upper orthogonal masses and then the rational turn of the lower block. Simple and effective.
Curious if moving the entire house down the hill and stretching it out a bit to make the climb more eventful. Stop at the bar along the way :cheers:
Mate I tried bringing the whole mass forward but it blows the building past the height envelope. The other issue is the severe exposure of the subfloor which is difficult to pass with our council.
I would like to bring a smaller studio underneath and place the living area where the studio is presently to permit the extreme cantilever of a deck forward over the steep. Like in the image posted recently of the Wright copy house from North by North West).
I'll play with it more before I'm finished I'm sure, still need to remain mindfull of our council and bushfire regs (If you have a deck it requires 8mm gapping between boards to allow water to be hosed through from the underside).
Cheers, Richard
lavardera
17-08-2005, 20:32
Very interesting volume study Richard - I can't wait to see the floor plan. Can you do all these angles in Word?
There was a very interesting hillside house in the last P|A Awards - I'll look it up - the 2:1 House by Iwamoto Scott Architecture.
All I could find was a small image but they also had a steep site, and flag shaped no less. They did not have the generous flat that this site has further up the hill so they chose to engage the hill a little bit further down the slope, using a daylighted basement level with a small footprint to make a pedestal, and then going very vertical and bridging to the rear of the site they were able to make an outdoor courtyard on the upslope of the site. Its a brilliant solution and if you can find any info on it it may be inspiring.
Thanks Greg I would like to see anymore info you can gather. I have a real difficult one here as I have to set the building back a minimum of 6m, and any external excavations can not exceed 1m, mind you even that will be in rock and I cant get an excavator / rock hammer on site.
It is really a bugger of a site, the first 15 metres elevation of occurs in the first 20 metres. the total steps to get to the front door is an 11 metre gain.
Mate I'm off to bed 4.44 am as I read it now!
More info about the house Greg posted:
Citation: 2:1 House, Iwamoto Scott Architecture
JANUARY 12, 2005 -- Site: A flag-shaped, 7,000-square-foot double lot in Berkeley, California, with a two-to-one slope and several constraints: zoning setbacks; a 10-foot-wide access route to the buildable portion of the site; a stand of ordinance-protected live oaks; and a reusable foundation from the site's original 1950s house.
Program: A three-bedroom residence with a library, family room, and a large studio.
Solution: Oriented toward the view of the San Francisco Bay, the house derives its sinuous form from the irregular site and the existing foundation's 5.5-degree shift in plan from the lot lines. According to the architects, "an internal terrain" of solids and voids winds across the contours and constraints of the steep hill. Access to the house is by automated lift from the street and by staircase and footpath at the site's upper reaches. A stepped library and family room at the house's midsection connects the lower-level living and sleeping volume to the studio and rooftop terrace above. Construction materials—transported up the hill by the lift—include earthquake-resistant insulated-concrete panels and wood and asphalt-shingle siding.
Jury comments: The jurors found in the architects' ideas a potentially influential strategy for steep, highly constrained urban conditions. "There's an enormously confined set of restrictions on this site," noted Brian Healy, "and they found a way to work around them. It's subtractive—they're actually working backwards." The design, believed Cruz, "anticipates patterns of development on difficult sites. The house is more than just a building—it is beginning to become a prototype of sorts." Cruz's assessment convinced Maurice Cox: "I thought it was an esoteric exercise, but you put it in a larger framework that has some coherence."
client: Roger and Thea Garner
architect: Iwamoto Scott Architecture, Berkeley, California—Lisa Iwamoto, Craig Scott (principals); Andrew Clemenza, Anne Kimura, Mike Eggers, Gee Ghid Tse, Manuel Lam (project team)
structural engineer: SMW Associates
area: 3,400 square feet
cost: $650,000
WilsonMetry
17-08-2005, 20:57
Richard,
I can understand your desire to keep the house on the upper portion where the slight flatness accommodates more cost effective construction...as well as the local and in-situ requirements
Its funny how the market demands only unique homes if designed for them, they truely do not want to invest in someone elses dream. Unless of course the unique home is afforded a unique location.
Your comment about custom houses is interesting. They do seem to have a difficult time selling for the first time, either for speculation of if the designer who built it for themself is moving on. Either way, what I have seen is if they can get through two or three owners then they have aged awhile and there is is certain provenance with them and they become more attractive. And as you said, the location can be the most attractive feature.
Also, I really like your presentation especially your first shot/cover board. The big brush stroke like texture on the site give it a beautiful quality. Very nice job. Also, the fact that you did such a beatuful presentation for yourself as the client is impressive! Perhaps I would have settled for a napkin sketch. :D
Call me lazy but thinking about climbing that many stairs on a daily basis makes my legs ache. Can you imagine carrying a case of your favorite cold ones up 55 stairs then having to go back down to get that frozen pizza?! :puke: Compositionaly everything looks great but do you really want to put yourself through such torture?
jparchitectus
17-08-2005, 22:41
I think your approach to this solution is quite like what you are used to solving. The solution seems very developer like...in that of the repetition of the same form. I do not think the same form repeated here at slightly different angles is working in your favor as it would normally for you (which you do so well).
I do agree with the others that the planning is quite nice, and the rotating forms seems to work, but maybe you could work with the individual forms a bit more. I like the inspiration or the direction Greg is leading you. I think a lot can be learned from the massing and geometries of that project. Currently your project (to me) appears to be 3 of the same thing. Where as the other is has different parts making the whole assembly. It tends to take the solution to another level.
You also have the potential to create a compound scheme with small structures linked along a path or line. Maybe some of the 55 steps can be lost with interior circulation ramps...or changes in section.
Just some thoughts. :wondering
lavardera
17-08-2005, 22:51
Not to invalidate your comments JP but Richard has subtle variations in each of those volumes - look at them again closely. If they were identical I would agree with you, but I think an interesting design theme can come out of these subtle shifts. None the less I'd like to see Richard apply his hand to a composition that plays the spaces these modules create between them as strongly as their own forms.
cobberman
17-08-2005, 22:55
I'm not familiar with the climate in your area Richard, but maybe if you separated different areas of the home with covered and uncovered walkways. this would break the 55 step commute into smaller walks which are more managable. Of course this is climate permitting.
WilsonMetry
17-08-2005, 22:56
On the other hand....
SCREW US ALL.....
you pull off the basic scheme you got going now with those incredibly strong and simple forms and you would be da man yo.
jparchitectus
17-08-2005, 23:08
Not to invalidate your comments JP but Richard has subtle variations in each of those volumes - look at them again closely. If they were identical I would agree with you, but I think an interesting design theme can come out of these subtle shifts. None the less I'd like to see Richard apply his hand to a composition that plays the spaces these modules create between them as strongly as their own forms.
No bad feelings..I noticed the slight variations, but maybe it is just not enough. It does have potential, but something to be just thinks it is not quite there. I do agree the planning of the interior intersections will be critical...and could be what helps generate some more character to the play of forms on the exterior.
Image #5 seems to have the best potential...although the entry as is a bit weak compared to the project you have selected as an example.
franjayo
18-08-2005, 03:21
Richard,
The presentation looks very nice, I am almost immediately sold, but I really do not understand the house without plan views.
I guess you want to go as high up as possible for the view, and I've stayed in vacation houses that go up almost the same height, but this is different, it's for everyday. I would thnik it twice if it was my money due to the height issue, it could limit your selling market substantially. Is there some compromise to get the house closer down the hill? Do you need to have a carport?
I agree with the elevator suggestion to reach all levels, at least to be included in the original plans, although unbuilt. This way you can sell the house to anyone worried about access. This increases your market and consequently value.
Francisco
I think that the steps will have to be there in almost any proposal for the site. The difference lays wether the steps are inside or outside the house.
I also would spread the house over the slope to make the stair be inside as much as I can. It could also provide a back for the building.
...The studio is for my work (well if it is ever built) but would also serve as a mutli function room for a family...
WOW! You've changed!
The layout of different simple volumes reminds me of Guardiola House wich also makes me think that your scheme is somewhat uninteresting for a lot like this. This example resembles yours in general terms, but eisenman made a thorough study of the juxtaposition and intersection that the volumes make and converted it in a unique design.
Disgregation and further analisys could provide a much richer scheme and a house that really belongs to the site.
Thank you all as always for provoking greater thought toward this project. I take your comments on board by the way JP I'm happy at present with the forward section of the dwelling and the rear not so. I agree with your idea of 'mixing it up a bit' and shall explore this option further mindfull though that to the rear the internal space arrangement (yet to be fully considered) is of importance basically as that area of the building will really be unseen.
I must really maintain the consideration toward economy as even when this project is eventually sold there is a tight ceiling in the precinct as to the likely price achievable. I considered constructing and selling the house prior to occupation however that ceiling is so tight that it would likely result in finacial losses at this time.
The incorporation of inclinators, lifts or even internal stairs and ramps would greatly reduce any financial gains. Specialising in profitable designs has always been my game and this one is TIGHT and as such the cheapest solution will be truly the only option. The form of construction Greg is hinting toward is well outside budget constraints as the building in todays terms needs to be sub $180,000 AUD to be even close to effective. The current sketch design is already likely to exceed this figure.
Any excavation into rock, given the site constraints will quickly exceed budget, currently bare rock extends about 12 - 15 metres from the front boundary toward the rear and therefore any excavation to the foreground areas will be subject to excavation of rock.
Even in consideration of JP's comments simple forms are more a result again of budget constraints.
That is in part the reason the building despite the stairs is located toward the rear COSTS. Although the number of stairs is and will be intimidating additional construction costs would place the building in a prohibative market level for its location.
It is one of those situations where placing the project at a level $20,000 less due to access is better than trying to reclaim $20,000 of additional costs.
In the medium density area in which I specialise I always confirm the ceiling price for an area firstly prior to consideration of the concept and design as best possible upto that ceiling. You cant make successful a project when you design and construct a unit that must achieve $450,000 in an area or precinct that will only support sales of $350,000.
I know I often sound very profit driven when I discuss design issues but long ago learnt or acknowledged that we are commissioned often to design for profit, we can stand on our pedestal and say we would never do that but the developer doesn't do development to just create nice living spaces and then pay people to live in them. We need to acknowledge their motivation to this end for ourselves and the services we offer to be successful.
I see too many developers sit on over designed development as a result of a general lack of this consideration and you can be sure the blame will put squarely on the shoulders of the designer for not paying proper consideration to this issue.
The general belief of the agents I regularly deal with indicates the cuurent ceiling on this site once developed is sub $380,000 and as a inclinator would add $30,000 to the project. One can therefore easily see it is not a cosideration. That doesn't suggest the inclusion of one would not be part of the application process but its inclusion prior to disposal is not a consideration.
So all this said, I would truly love to design for this site as if budget constraints were not a consideration but I need to be a realist or simply develop a dream for someone else to enjoy and for me to pay for.
My aim is to be in and out of this project within 2-3 years as I more an apartment dweller. The idea of owning, living and maintaining a house and garden is way beyond my desire for leisure time. Sweeping the deck and cleaning the windows is all I ever wish to afford out of valuable leisure time. I'd rather go climbing!!!!!
Cacapis
What change the family idea is not something I'm thinking of, that will never happen mate. I think (hope) I'm shooting blanks after years of racing mountain bikes (not an uncommon side effect).
I dont take offence to the suggestion at all that the form is rather uninteresting, I'm certainly mindful of that and will as suggested play further with the concept I've at this point only spent a few hours on it. But as said the market here often shy away from something too unique and the budget truely needs to be maintained.
The idea of internal stairs shall be incorporated between the living and bedroom areas but an internal well from the studio to the living area cant simply be afforded. I will document and sell the idea more on the "Detached Studio" as justification toward this short coming "turn a negative into a positive"!
The thing is that although something inspiring here may work BUT banks here will only lend money on 80% of the bank valuation, as the values in the area are rather low it is not an issue of what people would be willing to spend on purchase but on what they can spend.
A point that I should also make here relative to the roof form selected, I have adopted a pitch of 10 deg to provide adequate pitch for leaves to be drained from the roof and also for the roof to pitch to the high side to make the gutters to be more easily accessible for cleaning. Leafless gutters will be installed although none of which are truly maintenance free. These considerations are due to our strict bushfire controls as the site is located in a high fire danger area.
Cheers mate, Richard
Playing further with this design and heeding JP's comments I've come to a slightly more playful alternative, still need to further consider reduction in costs, but much happier with this version (thanks for the prompt mate).
With this version I have worked internal stair access from the studio to the living area (taken Cacapis's suggestion).
This is a rough illustration of how this is achieved.
Ok, I'm liking this one more and less than the previous one.
What I like less is that now you don't have that tilt between the volumes that you had on the previous version. Anyways it's something that can be easily changed by adding a slight tilt that doesn't change the layout.
What I like more is how you did the new stair and how you're starting to be more playful with the volumes.
On the other hand I still think it's not enough. In your situation I would either go to a way more daring design or to absolutely pure.
You have all the time in the world and freedom to do this one. You're too concerned about people wanting to buy the house. If it's you who is going to live there at first you should do what you please.
I like what you are starting to do in the upper and lower volumes with those wall changes, but right now it's just a slight gesture.
You can also go for the extremely pure volume language and do three cubes in a geometric composition in contrast with the landscape bla bla bla bla.
I hope it helps.
Thanks mate for putting your ideas on paper for me!
I actually saw benefit to an alternative to the tilt between forms as reducing construction issues, making the room of a more suitable shape (the apartment I'm in now has a 45 deg dog leg in all the rooms and I have found it almost impossible to effectively furnish these spaces, it was a well timed lesson for a designer) and in consideration of costs and the fact that the dwelling due to elevation above the road can only be seen from two vantage points.
Coming up the road.
I really like this design. I do agree the steps would not be for all and that they could be integrated at the upper volumes under cover or enclosed. It would be a shame to have to duplicate what is outside on the inside from a cost stand point. I like the lowest sculptural enclosure and the language represented overall so far. I question the introduction of the apetrue in the lower level enclosures orange vertical plane. It seems inconsitent with the planar and volumetric language already present. If it were closer to horizontal I could see the frame expressed as elsewhere put it seems firmly planted in a planar expression.
I dont mind personally the walk .. I have a 100 yards to my front door in any weather and almost 300 when it snows as my house is 75 feet below the nearest paved surface.( Cobble stone the rest of the way) I dont have steps but a fairly serious grade in the winter long walks. The Guardiola House mentioned previously is accessed primarily in the design from above 30 steps down to the entry and an additional forty to the water.
Growing up on and near the water here in Annapolis .. its not uncommon for the docks to be 100 ft below the house a fair number of steps (about 150 steps). No one complains when the water is the destination.
This is a fantastic start to fine solution. You might also look at pile foundations in the rock as well as expolsive demolitions along linear areas. A commercial driller for office buildings can drill piles very quickly and affordably. As well as a dock water pile driller as they are used to reduced construction schedules.
This could give you a reduced excavation foot print and give you a reduced impact area given enough height above grade. The house could then also act as cover.
Thank you Page for your great insight yet again.
I take on board well your point on the introduced appature in the orange element to the carport and shall consider an alternative there.
The stairs I'm still battling with and certainly shall give this more consideration, as always though I would always suggest to my own clients that the creation of excessive access stairs should not be avoided at the cost of additional internal stairs.
Negotiating numerous access stairs on leaving or arriving is a better trade off to negotiating numerous internal stairs all day.
As far as piling goes, as hard rock is situated on or just below the surface, (some medium to large floaters are also of concern) the standard method of footing in these situation here is kept rather simple, as shown below (done in a word doc by the way), where the base plate is simply bolted through into rock.
(done in a word doc by the way), where the base plate is simply bolted through into rock.
It is great delight to be able to see the evolution of an idea in real time. I am duley impressed with your design and your facile creativity (in MS Word no less.)
This is one of the many pleasures of this forum.
Daaaamn Richard, are you still using Word for your 2D drawings? I'm amazed with the quality you get out of a word processor. Have you tried playing around with Illustrator or Quark? Or do you still find Word faster?
Page
Thanks mate, I'll keep all posted as this design develops, must say I so much appreciate being able to use the forums here to get feedback as for a one man show this is always a difficulty.
Axie
Mate I haven't tried illustrator but a little sketch like that about takes absolutely no time. And I think for simple illustrations keeps them quite tidy.
Cheers, Richard
imasayer
25-08-2005, 16:34
I like the evolution. I think you have also simplified construction quite a bit. I liked the first one and I think that you have improved upon it. Sorry I don't have a more to add a moment.
Have you considered stacking your volumes from one cost effective foundation? You can still reach back to the land with platforms and walkways, while creating pre-fab (maybe) volumes that can be fabricated off site and craned into place. Meier's Douglas House comes to mind for me with steep sites. This suggestion may eliminate a few stairs on the exterior of the building.
Oh yeah. Good luck trying to keep costs down with getting materials to the site.
DouglasHouse-Section.jpg
richard, just saw your initial study and i love it... i realize you have moved forward a bit from there, but i am reminded a bit of another aussie house that i saw in our DWELL magazine a few months ago. it overlooked a cove in a community just north of sydney (i believe...). they used a funicular to conquer the situation with the slope.
i looked, but i can't find the magazine in the 'pile management' system i have set up on my desk. maybe somebody else has access to this fine publication and can give you a bit of help... the one thing about that though is that the separate pavillions which made up the house were stacked orthagonally above each other as they stepped up the hill. they did not have quite the dynamic - and i would imagine, relationship to the micro-terrain of the site that your project does.
cheers and best of luck with what looks to be a fun and rewarding project. probably a lot better than the 8000 square foot 'country french' manse that i am having to regurgitate at the moment... :puke:
lavardera
02-09-2005, 23:49
jbender is referring to the James-Robertson Residence by Dawson Brown Architects in Great Mackerel Beach. Its a great looking project on a steep hillside going down to the rocky coast.
Looking at the pictures it appears to be surrounded by some more cool looking modern hillside houses!
Thanks JB and Greg
I have that article and a few others on that same house and yes very nice and actually in a worse situation than mine in that only access is by water. Funny thing is although that mouse is about 120k away by road I came actually turn my haed left as a type (what a talent) and see the hillside on which it is perched.
The difference between these two projects is one of budget, theirs was rather unrestrained. If they were to market that house today I'd imagine it would sell for around $ 2m compared to mine $0.4m, certainly makes things look different.
Actually a friend of mine built a contract home adjacent to theirs and was informed one day it had flooded, Huh? The homes are required to have in excess of 20 000 litres of water storage for fire fighting. One of the tank stands that supports an 18 000 litre tank (which the engineer later admitted he had only designed to support 5 tonne) had collapsed and then 18000 litres poured through the house. The engineer now recalls his education that 1000 litres = 1 tonne.
Came across this site
www.pugh-scarpa.com/indexmain.html
Kantar Vladimir
10-09-2005, 01:34
I just want to say i love this project and the form is very complicated and simply in same time.And that is what makes this house so live.
Dont let stairs disturb you.
You can reconstruct somethin like ski pass... :) just kiding.
Very nice!
CHEERS :rock on:
Red
Thanks for the link, great site!
Kantar
Thanks mate, fun project to work on! But now we just need snow!
Cheers Richard
[QUOTE=ryarch]Have you considered stacking your volumes from one cost effective foundation? You can still reach back to the land with platforms and walkways, while creating pre-fab (maybe) volumes that can be fabricated off site and craned into place. Meier's Douglas House comes to mind for me with steep sites. This suggestion may eliminate a few stairs on the exterior of the building.
Oh yeah. Good luck trying to keep costs down with getting materials to the site.
Ryarch
Mate
I would love to stack the volumes but I have to comply with our loacl planning regulations, 4 metres to the uppermost floor, 10 metres overall, and then 4.5 metres up from all boundaries and 45 deg projected up from that.
So even complying with these as is, I'm finding difficulty on the low side boundary.
Cheers, Richard
wegofaster
12-10-2005, 18:45
nice... i have 2 pools where you go down 70+ steps to get to the boat dock.
http://www.jansotelo.com/gallery/view_photo.php?set_albumName=album83&id=topo
http://www.jansotelo.com/gallery/view_photo.php?set_albumName=album11&id=Williams_final_019
i like these sites, you have to get creative... good job
Jan
Mate I can't believe the amount of stonework in that second job, my god!!!
By the way the new animated banner at the top of your page is so apt mate.
wegofaster
20-10-2005, 22:53
Thanks Richard! I like the water banner too. I will keep that in the next version of our website.
Yes the stone work takes some time. we are just getting ready to start the stone on the second project, should be a months work for my 7 stone masons.
Its starting to take shape, heres the rendering next to the actual.
http://www.jansotelo.com/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album68
Thanks Again
Sorry Richard. I don't know Jan. I would have to say the water banner is extremely distracting and covers part of the navigation links along the top. In a non-animated form fine, but I found my eye wandering to the banner and not the work.
That IS a lot of stonework.
Sorry Richard. I don't know Jan. I would have to say the water banner is extremely distracting and covers part of the navigation links along the top. In a non-animated form fine, but I found my eye wandering to the banner and not the work.
That IS a lot of stonework.
Yeh mate I checked it out again and you might be right it does gain your attention, maybe if the M O D E R N_Design logo was incorporated into the animation it would draw attention to the company more which is never a bad thing for identity.
mimilapin
16-01-2006, 13:01
ReD
Came across this site
www.pugh-scarpa.com/indexmain.html
Vail Grant Residence, Architectural Record Project Portfolio (http://www.archrecord.construction.com/projects/portfolio/archives/0504unbuilt/vailGrantRes/overview.asp)
WilsonMetry
18-01-2006, 08:10
Mimi, thanks for bring this back up. Love this project.
----Hey, richard, has that dead beat client come up with the mula yet? :D
shmoolikipod
15-01-2007, 13:50
richard, what's up with the project? (mind the pun......)
Is it still alive?
nicholas
15-01-2007, 15:00
yeah; would love to see...
In this case I am the client
And you thought typical paying clients were pains in the arse?;)
Congrats., and eager for more developments:cheers:
Nice project Richard -
Coming rather late into this thread, I'm afraid - I like the limitations, having a 1M limit is an interesting one - but for the sake of the discussion I'm throwing wire-cutting into the ring as a pretty amazing way to excavate a site with a very smooth cut. I'm not suggesting you need to get crazy on the excavations, but this does open for interesting results as you can cut horizontal or sloping cuts as well using the same technique.
Image below from Snøhetta's Peter Dass museum in Alstahaug, Norway (way northern norway) - small museum project, set into a mountainside in the landscape. The building is placed in the slice to integrate it with the landscape and tone it down with respect to the historic church on the site.
Excavation image:
Building under construction - to be finished this summer (2007).
Cost would obviously be an issue. :)
What is the machinery used for this kind of cutting ?
Cost would obviously be an issue. :)
But in a house like Richard's some small excavation would prove a great way to integrate the house into the slope.
By the way is there any news on this house Ricardo?!
Nice project Richard -
Coming rather late into this thread, I'm afraid - I like the limitations, having a 1M limit is an interesting one - but for the sake of the discussion I'm throwing wire-cutting into the ring as a pretty amazing way to excavate a site with a very smooth cut. I'm not suggesting you need to get crazy on the excavations, but this does open for interesting results as you can cut horizontal or sloping cuts as well using the same technique.
Image below from Snøhetta's Peter Dass museum in Alstahaug, Norway (way northern norway) - small museum project, set into a mountainside in the landscape. The building is placed in the slice to integrate it with the landscape and tone it down with respect to the historic church on the site.
Excavation image:
Would you please give me some information this machine? Thanks
Info on diamond wire cutting found here: http://www.cuttingtechnologies.com/candc.html
"A motorized system of drive and guide wheels pulls a diamond-encrusted wire around – and ultimately through – the object being cut. To cut voids from a larger structure, pilot holes are first drilled into the structure at the ends of each cutting plane. The wire is then fed through the holes to create the loop that will sever the spoils from the remaining form.
Typical Materials Cut: Heavily-reinforced concrete, solid stainless steel and rock.
Cut Sizes: Limitless dimensions and volume.
Typical Cutting Applications: Crossovers in extremely thick structures.
Demolition of mass-concrete forms such as dams, towers, piers and nuclear facilities. Cutting of structures under water or otherwise inaccessible. Cutting of fixtures with complex, irregular shapes.
Advantages: Precise cuts with no over-cutting at corners and smooth finished surfaces. Lack of vibration, noise, dust and flying debris enables “clean” demolition in sensitive and occupied areas.
Controlled cutting leaves remaining structures safely intact.
Quick, versatile, safe and economical alternative to conventional demolition."
The interesting thing about the diamond wire saw is how you make the cut - you first bore a pilot hole (or holes) at the edges of your cut, thread the diamond wire, then it basically spins the wire through the hole and puts tension on it by pulling taut. Once you have made the cut you fill the slice with sand to protect the surface you want to keep, the rest can be excavated my more traditional and brutal methods. The final surface is extremely smooth and clean. Surgical precision on a large scale.
We have also used this technique for the entrance stone facade of the Norwegian Embassy in Berlin. A "little piece" of norway was freighted to berlin and used as the front facade of the truncated triangular building. A monolithic stone that weighs approximately 120 tons and is over 14 meters tall, 5 meters wide and up to 70 centimetres thick. The 'back' side is a precise cut, whereas the front was the exposed surface of the stone at the quarry, which is natural and worn with the passage of glaciers and time.
More images here (http://www.snoarc.no/default.asp?V_DOC_ID=889)
arrestme
15-01-2007, 22:42
This is hijacking the thread, but I just have to ask! What the ... has this to do with Petter Dass?! Snøhetta is higly overrated...
IMO :puke:
I posted to this thread to discuss the excavation possibilities of Richards interesting project, so I don't think it's the place for a debate on the aesthetics and relevance of the project used as an example.
Perhaps it should look a bit more like this?
pika0612
12-11-2007, 11:35
But in a house like Richard's some small excavation would prove a great way to integrate the house into the slope.
By the way is there any news on this house Ricardo?!
Yea, i think u should post ur final work or presentations..its a really nice project and i think avone is looking forward to have a look at ur work~~:D
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.