I guess I'll give this another try. I hope I can get a more productive response than I did the first time.

This is the same home I showed in the rendering I posted before. I started by doing a concept of the exterior.

This is where I am at on the floor plan:

I want to put a clear story over the back windows. I like the clear story on my concept design.

Maybe the clear story on this dotted line

My idea for the fireplace is that it stores the heat produced in it's thermal mass and radiates it into the bedroom during the night.

Also the storage closet behind the media cabinet allows access to the equipment wiring.

The five seats in front of the back window are individual chairs that can be spread out.

I would run in my local arch library to check plans and projects of good ol' Frank lloyd Wright... Hard to tell more now as you display only part of the plan. I doubt I would sleep behind that "thermal mass" wall, at least in that position... Headaches!

i like the thermal wall idea a lot but would it be too hot?

and i can't relate the plan with perspective, where is the entry in your plan?

I can't see that the wall would build up that much heat on the outside.

My thinking is that it would be some sort of very efficient steel box enclosed within a masonry cavity which would heat up from the inside out. Perhaps vents could also be used to create a circulation loop between the bedroom and living room through the masonry cavity. For example vents low on the livingroom side and high on the bedroom side may create some airflow through the cavity.

I would assume the bed would have some type of head board.

The rendering was more of a concept model that actually relating to the floorplan. It gave me a couple of the ideas that are in the current plan and a general idea of the kind of look I want but now I want to attack the problem from a functional floorplan perspective and not worry to much about matching the exterior render.

The clients are early 50ish, no kids at home, the home is on 16 acres. I still need: master suite, two other bedrooms, utility/hobby room, office/ham radio,
carport. The portico will be a part of the final floorplan because the owners want one.

The kitchen might fit in nicely here. They want to have two opening to the kitchen for good circulation during parties.

I suppose the ideal position might be to have your feet close to the thermal mass.

Here was my last attempt at working from the model

I think this entry would work well

I think the entry may work a bit better off center:

What about stretching the plan making it longer and more narrow (doesn't seem to be a space restriction)- Doesn't seem to be working for passive solar (even factoring the clear story) + would allow cross ventilation.

What is the climate like there?

Yeah, I had started out trying it narrower (see post #9)

My feeling about cross ventilation is that it isn't very important considering current expectations of people in the USA. By the time it gets hot enough where a little extra air movement would be a benefit, people will shut the windows and turn on the AC. The downside of good cross ventilation is that it generally results in a lot of windows and exterior surface area as a proportion to the interior volume. This would be fine if we where living without AC but when people insist on maximum comfort it becomes a liability.

The orientation has a bit of flexibility but I expect to get evening sun on the front in the summer so I thought it might be better to limit windows on that side.

I do like the windows in the original kitchen area. I thought I would make the clearstory windows operable.

This climate is hot and humid. We have about 5-1/2 months of AC weather and about three months or less of light heating. My strategy is to optimize winter sun through the rear clearstory and then limit summer sun as much as possible. Summer breeze is generally from the South-East

Energy efficiency is a primary concern with this project and I appreciate all discussion about that.

Oh, Michel, I forgot to mention. I have seen a lot of Wrights work and own a copy of The Natural House and it is some inspiration.

working on the entry kitchen area

those drawings look pretty interesting as a section. I have trouble figuring out where the ground line is.

What is the latitude?

I have to admit my ignorance and say I don't know what a ground line is.

the latitude is 30.44.53

current plan

Is this for a new house ?

Explain the siting; given the house is roughly equivalent to a site between sydney and brisbane (latitude wise) and your description- cooling is of primary concern yet the trees seem to block the SE prevailing summer breeze

yes this is a new house.

The siting is because the clients want it there. I want to put it in the already cleared cove which has much better western protection with trees and a little clearing already made through the woods which could be expanded a bit to funnel in wind but they won't budge.

here is what I have so far. the main area and carport side are not bad. I'm having real problems trying to fit a master bath, closet, two guest bedrooms and a bath on the other side.

Ok the bedroom side finally fell into place.

It has many features I like. The two guest bedrooms and bathroom can be closed off which will save energy. The bedrooms have good separation with closets in between rooms to increase privacy . The master bath continues the triangular projections.

Also the heated area is under our mark.

A few more tweaks and continuation of triangles.

continuation of "triangles"? I'm having a hard time following why are you introducing so many 45 degree features in plan. Are you developing or thinking in terms of section, elevation, 3D? how are you coming to any conclusion about the development of this project? how can you lean on one image to show your concept when it looks like a finished image of a building?

I'm not sure if I understand all your questions.

The angles work to make the plan flow and give it a consistent feel.

Yes I am thinking in terms of section, elevation and 3D.

I don't understand about the conclusion of the development. Based on my conversations with the clients and my understanding of the site I feel this design will perform very well.

Actually there are several more images on my website and flicker page. This was the first time I have started by doing a concept render with nothing but a rough idea of the layout. Since the clients had no set ideas I wanted to start by developing the sort of look I had in mind.

here is an early render of the back

This was the first time I have started by doing a concept render with nothing but a rough idea of the layout. Since the clients had no set ideas I wanted to start by developing the sort of look I had in mind.

:wondering

Chris,

You are stating that your process is just the opposite of what most of us have been taught. You decide a look first and then try to fit a design into it.

By experience, when you do this, the first try would probably produce the best option and then it will go downhill, which seems to be what is happening here. You are in a straightjacket and when you try to fix some things, many others fall out of place. Like when you noticed the lack of privacy in the entrance and tried to fix it by adding an offset. It does not make much sense in such a symatrical plan to have that offset just off center. You preconceived the door in the center, but it does not work.

In summary it is a process problem.

at the moment you don't seem to have a concept, what this design also lack is a clear sense of tectonics/composition.

as far as i can see, you are dealing with a series of volumes, all colliding into the main volume which is the living spaces. (see diagram below)

step 1... the big box

step 2... the orange bits which should somehow be related rather than what you have currently

step 3... additional red bits are colliding further with the other geometries, whilst respecting the symmetry of the overall scheme (or maybe not), but what are these special 'pods' that are added?

here is the skp file for your reference

franjayo, I probably would have agreed with that a few days ago. I was feeling trapped by the initial concept and that is when I threw out everything but what I started the thread with. I had made up my mind to just disregard the rendering and focus only on the layout. It just evolved back to what I had initially conceived. Of coarse when I did the rendering I already had the basic layout in mind. Actually the entry I had started with would work fine I just like the new one better. It was not a matter of privacy, (the clients also liked the original entry) I didn't like the symmetry, also Wright was mentioned by the clients as an inspiration and I felt turning it sideways and walking into a hidden cove was something he would have appreciated.

And still if I wanted the opening to be centered within the portico I certainly could still do that, I just don't see the benefit.

That being said, would I do it this way again? Maybe not being bound by a floorplan gave me more freedom to be creative. You can see I made several changes from the initial model so it did not really bind me to a fixed form.

If I had stuck to my initial drawing of the entry than I would have let the concept control the plan.

SWANK-E, I guess my lack of formal education gives me the ability to completely ignore tectonic/composition since I don't know what it is :)

I don't really see in practical terms how matching the volume of the orange areas makes them relate to each other any better. The roof is the same height on both sides of the main area except over the carport so until you get to the carport the sides are matched. Are you suggesting that I need better symmetry?

Are the red areas the pods or what are the pods?

I like the geometries colliding. I call it good flow. The clients really wanted something of about 2800 sq. ft. and it is really mostly my efforts to get the size down and energy efficiency up. Forcing the parts into each other reduces the size and makes one area become another. The living room flows into the master bedroom through the fireplace and the dinning room flows into the screened porch through the twin doors.

SWANK-E, I guess my lack of formal education gives me the ability to completely ignore tectonic/composition since I don't know what it is :)
It simply means the composition and articulation of the different parts. At the moment, especially with some of your later schemes, your parts are all over the place without any strong reason.

I don't really see in practical terms how matching the volume of the orange areas makes them relate to each other any better. The roof is the same height on both sides of the main area except over the carport so until you get to the carport the sides are matched. Are you suggesting that I need better symmetry?

Not necessarily symmetry, but the orange parts does look to be related and therefore they should at least line up, as if the big block living area is just somewhere along this orange volume. Your current and later scheme is treating the volume on the right as yet another volume, which i feel is starting to get too bitsy by introducing yet another element in the scheme.

Are the red areas the pods or what are the pods?

Yes, they read as something special, and in your schemes, seem to have a seperate geometry thereby enforcing that they are something special. Are they really special spaces?

Chris the image you posted in #26 shows a lot of promise. As someone suggested you should look in great detail at some of frank lloyd wrights houses. It definately has a FLW feel. The thing that is dominating that image though is the eaves which are either too thin if you are FLW and too weird a colour or too thick. The raised portion, (first floor) needs much more work, it stands out like sore thumb: the roof finish should definately be the same as the rest of the building and I suggest a dark colour to the timber cladding so it recedes.


Not necessarily symmetry, but the orange parts does look to be related and therefore they should at least line up, as if the big block living area is just somewhere along this orange volume. Your current and later scheme is treating the volume on the right as yet another volume, which i feel is starting to get too bitsy by introducing yet another element in the scheme.

This is good advice on the plan. I was going to suggest the same thing, I guess it is because it is a work in progress but the plan needs much more rigour. firm it up. I also think you should be articulating the plan much more with step outs and indents (this is not in conflict with rationalising it). At the moment the plan doesn't look like your image on post #26. Specific things I don't like in plan are the relationships between the car port and mud room and porch. The corridor that leads to the master suite could be one place you "indent" to make a tectonic separation between living and sleeping. Also do you really want the husband boozing with his buddies on the porch at 2am while is wife is trying to sleep just a pane fo glass away (or vice versa)? why not separate the functions somehow? I don't get why them being connected to the chimney makes this a proper connection?

By the way it's not good enough to say that "I didn't have a formal education..." it's not rocket science that we are doing so it should not be beyond anyone to explain and justify their work. And besides you've posted it here, for your peers to crtitique, I think you should show a bit more respect for the responses.

Lastly don't sweat the 1star your thread got: its not a 1 star poject (just maybe not a ppb style) :D Thanks for posting your project, always good to see the live ones.

Well I need to give some thought to these questions but I will immediately say that I am not disrespecting anyones comments by saying I don't know what they mean. Sorry if I don't know what a ground line or tectonics are (as relates to architecture) Certainly I expected and am interested in ideas which will make this a better house. I don't mind defending my ideas and the people who choose to make suggestions should also expect to defend why their idea is better and not just a change based on their preference.

Swank-e, I think gorgon is wrong about the effect of me not having a formal education. Tectonics means something in particular to you, I think of the Earths crust. You perhaps have been trained to look at things that I don't see at all. Currently I don't see how balancing the size of the orange areas will make the plan better. I could certainly make the carport deeper or make the bedroom wing shallower. I had also considered letting that wing go off at an angle and that might be a better way to differentiate one wing from the other since they have different functions.

I have considered this general shape also. Given my liberal use of 45deg angles this may be a better solution. It would keep the porch from trapping air and I like the shorter end wall facing the summer sunset. The longer back wall would get better winter sun and the front has nice consistent northern exposure. I suppose the morning sun coming into the master bedroom in the winter could be a problem with the current configuration.

gorgon, the upper roof is darker because it is made of solar panels the eave is thin over the clear story because it incorporates a shading device which is hinged along the fascia and can fold underneath the soffit when it isn't needed.

how about this?

I am not understanding the energy efficiency aspects; can you elaborate more on this? (I have noticed the solar panels and ability to thermally isolate unused parts of the house)

I think that the living space could (to mention again) be lengthened...I would prefer to be on the edge of the landscape rather than the edge of the kitchen or dead space in the centre of the volume. The kitchen looks like alot of hard work to use for cooking...

Why is lengthening the main area better?

I don't understand ...the edge of the landscape rather than the edge of the kitchen or dead space in the centre of the volume.

If you are referring to the island in the middle of the kitchen this was requested by the client. How bout this?

I was referring to the position of a body in the space...the leanness would give a greater connection to the landscape + allow for efficient solar control and cross ventilation (being the priority for the climate)- somehow it seems to be cosy as if the local had long cold winters and brief warm summers


The kitchen is awkward due to the distances and pathways to move between fridge, sink, range and prep areas + designed for someone who loves cleaning

Energy efficiency is going to be a function of the total volume and how much surface area it takes to enclose that volume. Of coarse also the number of windows and the effectiveness of the insulation system. The most efficient shape would be the circle next would be square The further you deviate from these simple shapes the lower the thermal efficiency gets (when you are using powered heating and cooling systems)

We have run our air conditioner about 1-1/2 days so far this year I would guess that most people around here have run theirs for two weeks or more because they will not open windows or tolerate cooler or warmer or more humid conditions than the ideal.

Energy efficiency is going to be a function of the total volume and how much surface area it takes to enclose that volume. Of coarse also the number of windows and the effectiveness of the insulation system. The most efficient shape would be the circle next would be square The further you deviate from these simple shapes the lower the thermal efficiency gets (when you are using powered heating and cooling systems)



Correct if you are not factoring passive means; using passive controls- in a warm environment the surface area of the glazing is not as important as the shading- given that large openings are usually glazed this facilitates cross ventilation in a volume of large surface area to volume ratio and the reciprocal does not. In humid climates passive cooling is very effective.

I don't think passive cooling is effective in humid climates (at least it is not considered to be here)

Humid conditions keep the night time temperatures higher and also take away the ability to use evaporative cooling.

Like I said- if I where designing this for people who will open the windows and tolerate hotter, colder or more humid conditions than the ideal than spreading it out might be a good thing.

As it is if the temperature is 80 deg. F. and the RH is 70% most people here would be running the AC

If you are after maximum efficiency, wouldn't you want to orient your solar panels to face due south or even slightly south-west?

yes, that would be ideal. The solar panels are just fantasy because the client does not want them. They also rejected my advice to orient the home with the rear facing south.

Now that I think about it nicholas, The temp is now 63 deg F. and the RH is 77% and I would guess that the vast majority of people would have their windows closed.

Using a Psychrometric Chart and data published in the ASHRAE handbook of fundamentals one can ascertain whether or not it is likely that people will be running their AC to lower humidity.

They publish data on when 50% of the population is comfortable within a certain range of temperature and humidity. There is a sweet spot on the psychometric chart that shows where 50% of the population would be comfortable.

I have to agree with the others that your process seems to be backwards or counter-intuitive. In essence you created a box (or shell) and now are trying to carve up the interior space to fit your program.

I think the most telling sign of the problem with your design process is that you have not really studied and responded to the context of the site. You have posted an aerial photo but nothing to describe the unique features of the site. What are the views from the site, to the site, what is the foliage like, are there any other natural features, etc?

As a result, this structure could be located here or just about anywhere else. In my opinion, a significant part of creating Architecture (with a capital 'A') occurs when a building responds to its place. Without that, it's just another building.

Chris,

I might have missed the explanation but why do you need the carport at the entrance, or front door? It seems redundant and a bit waste of money and does nothing for shading, as it is on the north side of the house. Is this a request from the client? If so have you tried to talk them out of the move?

You perhaps have been trained to look at things that I don't see at all. Currently I don't see how balancing the size of the orange areas will make the plan better.

This first sentence Chris explains a lot in the discussions about your design and the misunderstandings of the critiques you are receiving. I am not really sure how to put this so I will just go out and say it. As a trained designer their is an understanding of balance, technique, and general way of looking at things. It is my personal view that if you lack these skills (and they can be learned) then maybe that person should not be designing. For instance you wouldn't go to a chiropractor to have surgery, you would go to a surgeon.

I think if you look at all the residential housing in the US there is a clear lack of design and thought process from fine trim details all the way to how communities are planned. Terminology aside it is clear to many on the forum that there is a disconnect in a design approach you have taken with this house (and in general?). This doesn't make you a bad person. Its just that philosophically you will probably not see eye-to-eye with most of the people on PPB with this type of house design (and I am talking about your approach and process, not the end product necessarily, though in this case I would include that too).

A book I would highly recommend would be "pattern language" by Christopher Alexander. This might help you to have a better understanding design, from the bigger picture all the way to the finest of details.

As for your second sentence I tagged with this post, this too tells us something about how you approach design. Being a good designer includes a thorough process and rigger to form and space. The comments Swank-E is making are in regard to your haphazard approach to angled walls and shifts that are not giving your design any meaningful benefits. By making the design more clean, and there isn't a true justification not to from what you have presented to us, you will probably have a more efficient and clearer design.

I think you have been very brave to post your work on a forum like PPB, which has some very talented designers and architects who exchange ideas and conversation. don't let that stop you and I hope that through the continued comments you can take something away from it all that will open your eyes to new things and be a positive learning experience.

yes, that would be ideal. The solar panels are just fantasy because the client does not want them. They also rejected my advice to orient the home with the rear facing south.

Now that I think about it nicholas, The temp is now 63 deg F. and the RH is 77% and I would guess that the vast majority of people would have their windows closed.

It is 7am here; 27 degrees C and 85%rh...all doors and windows open- listening to a light rain cicadas and the birds....The temperature will climb to about 33 degrees C- the doors and windows will remain open and slight air movement (large volume) keeps the house comfortable

Each to their own

Our temperature and humidity is very similar to yours, nicholas. Most people here also live with open doors, maybe partly by tradition, maybe by necessity. Rising costs for oil do help keep it this way. Most people here have a higher level of resistance to the combination of heat/humidity than those not used to it.

I remember on a trip returning from being several weeks in the Arizona desert area, when I arrived, the local climate hit me hard. I had begun to get used to the comparatively very low humidity, even though heat was even higher than we are used to.

Most people from a dry climate (as I am) find it difficult to adjust- the high humidity certainly hits you like a wall stepping outside the airport and into the humidity in SE Asia. However the affect of the moisture in the air is cooling...so if you have air movement you can achieve relative comfort by passive means in a way that in a dry 35 degree c wouldn't be possible

I have recently moved into a colonial house that is designed pre air conditioning (obviously) and it proves that passive cooling works- it just takes large volumes of air (large openings both sides)

Yes, I'm sure the Psychrometric Chart is an accurate indicator of when people would feel comfortable at certain temperature and humidity levels Archjake but what it does not tell you is how they actually behave.

I think for most Americans it is a matter of convenience. It is simply easier to keep the windows closed and let the thermostat control the weather than to open and close windows and have to put up with a temperature and humidity levels that are not ideal. The consequence is that we consume more energy per capita than any nation on Earth.

So I think you have to design for what people actually do and not what you think they should do for the most part.

I did not include all of those details adapt because I felt it was beyond the scope of what you all needed to know about the project and it would take a lot of time to post all of that info.

The front carport was requested by the clients wizum, yes I tried to talk them out of doing that but they are pretty stubborn folks. Pattern Language has been on my book list so I'm sure I'll get it before to long.

If energy cost where higher here in the states franjayo I am sure we would make do with natural conditions more. Much of Arizona is ideal for thermal cooling.

I still kind of like the original bedroom wing layout. Here it is about 200 sq. ft. bigger.

I think for most Americans it is a matter of convenience. It is simply easier to keep the windows closed and let the thermostat control the weather than to open and close windows and have to put up with a temperature and humidity levels that are not ideal. The consequence is that we consume more energy per capita than any nation on Earth.

So I think you have to design for what people actually do and not what you think they should do for the most part.


Chris,

I don't think its a matter of convenience at all. Its a pure matter of laziness!!! Also the fact that most buildings are designed as closed-off boxes with a completely separate system of climate control, regardless of where you are geographically. Its sad but that is the state of building in the US, especially in residential construction.

So, a question to you Chris... if we are the ones who are the "experts" in designing these buildings, shouldn't we be the ones who influence both the client and politicians to guide our buildings to become better designed as to function and be more energy efficient? The answer is obvious but yet we as designers/architects have failed in this fight. A cultural shift in how people live in America has to occur first, and I think we are a long ways away from that happening.

yes I agree with the term lazy I was just trying to be gentle.

Yes, it is up to us. and some of us take that roll seriously.

I decided to change the master bath to a bow out

and here is a preliminary exterior back render Dec. 10am

I decided to change the master bath to a bow out

care to share why? (as to encourage others to give you feedback in a valuable way rather than dish out gut emotive response)

Well I don't have any grand theories like tectonics to work with so the reason I do anything is usually either that I think it functions better, the clients request it or I just like something better (and it doesn't conflict with the first two reasons)

Even though I'm not exactly sure how aligning the two wings improves the design, or that swanke would consider the two sides aligned now I did what I could to make that change.

While I don't think gorgons concern about late night partying is a likely scenario I thought the bow window addressed that issue some. It also reduced the total window area which will increase energy efficiency (since they and most people around here don't really use cross ventilation)

I generally like a consistent feel so changing the bathroom windows to bow does that for the master suite it also reduces the total window area and makes the windows easier to reach. After I had made that change the clients told me they where interested in using a free standing claw foot tub which will work nicely in that space.

By the way, I did spend some time searching for info on tectonic composition but have not found more than vague references. It is a popular business name and computer people also use it to describe software but without any set rules to follow I can't really address that issue.

and here is the latest floorplan with some minor changes requested by the clients

Here is some detailing work on the portico. Also I was thinking it might be nice to have a larger window in the hallway.

The 'screened porch' on shot #60 is the only 'generous' gesture in your project. At least for me... The entry is... errrh... pardon me, but quite ridiculous. You're being way to 'generous' (sorry, once again...) with cars, the living spaces look enclosed in a bunker compared to what you offer for parking space! 'Tectonic composition' could be understood as a way to organize spaces / volumes / forms (...) together so that the whole generates a sense of harmony (pardon me for my poor english... probably not the best definition...). In other words, architecture, in its broader meaning, is not just a matter of putting one function along another... which is, I'm sorry to say, what this project looks to me.

Was there a program to start with? This house has grown a lot!

Was there a budget discussed before starting the design? it has expanded substantially.

Michel, I agree.

I see the same pre conceived image growing from the center out. I still think what I said before is true, start over. Lacks process.

I have to agree with michel. The art of organizing spaces/volumes and forms in a harmonic, structured and balanced way is what people have been alluding to in previous posts.

For me, as it stands the plan is pretty shambolic. I can see why though, as you have worked backward from some initial "model" you have really struggled to fit the program into the plan, and as such you have a very imbalanced arrangement.

Your arguement seems to be that because everything is there and next to the right thing then the plan works, for me it doesnt. there is no palpable sense of arrangement or reasoning in the plan. I really think that if you want to achieve "good architecture" in this building then you need to take a few steps back and solidify your concept and then your basic zonal arrangement, then you can start putting things in and testing it.

Id also advise that you get a copy of "Form, space and order" by F D Ching. Its a fantasitc book (its probably on every universitys reading list!) and its all about the things people have mentioned.

Again Michel, saying something is generous or not is pretty vague. What makes something generous? The portico (as I have already explained) is a client requirement. I know vaguely that tectonics has to do with space composition and also materials but without clear rules tectonics is useless to me as a design tool. I would have an easier time trying to design with Feng Shui (at least there is a lot written about it). Design is about putting one function along with another. Function is the primary responsibility of the architect art is secondary.

franjayo, as I said before my initial drawing was well below the target area which was 2800 sq. ft. I was attempting to get the clients to think smaller. He wanted it smaller but she always wanted 2800 which is about 550 less than their current house. Again "lacks process" is so vague I can't respond much. You can't design without some sort of process. Perhaps you mean to say that it lacks the typical process or lacks the process that you would use?

The majority of complaints seems to stem from my choice of starting with a rendering. It seems to me we always start with some preconceived idea. Whether we put it on paper or not we all have certain ideas about how the form will look or how the rooms will be arranged or how the geometry will work or whatever. Having designed houses both ways I think both methods are valid. After designing hundreds of houses you get a pretty good idea of how they will lay out and the ability to visualize it without drawing it out. The only arrangement I really tried to stick to was the main living area which met the requirements, needs and desires of the clients on each side I was not really set on any particular form. If getting those areas to work correctly had required me to change my initial concept I would have.

As far as the "program" is concerned, my program is to provide a house that the clients are happy with and which meets there needs. In addition to that (even if they don't care) I think a home should be energy efficient and adapted to the environment in which it will live.

Again "imbalanced arrangement" is to vague to be useful. I own that book superjim, Ching is definitely proficient at archispeak other than that I don't see much merit in the book. I certainly don't see anything in it that would suggest this design is bad. If you do please point it out.

So far I am pleased with the crits. They have all been so vague it tells me that they have more to do with this not being the preferred ppb2 style than any real flaw in the design.

So you are saying because you don't understand the criticism that everything must be ok.

In addition to that (even if they don't care) I think a home should be energy efficient and adapted to the environment in which it will live.


They have all been so vague it tells me that they have more to do with this not being the preferred ppb2 style than any real flaw in the design.

Please elaborate on the first sentence above; I am struggling to understand the environmental aspect and adaptation.

Rather than get defensive; why not use this valuable resource for productive means. I think from the posts on this thread that rather than rejection based on style people are attempting to contribute and are struggling to find a coherent process or relevant feedback. Up to you....

So far I am pleased with the crits. They have all been so vague it tells me that they have more to do with this not being the preferred ppb2 style than any real flaw in the design.

No. It just proves you are so close-minded. We do not preach "style", we preach "process". Yet again another way you do not understand this forum. Have you attempted to read about any other projects and their process in these forums?

As far as the "program" is concerned, my program is to provide a house that the clients are happy with and which meets there needs. In addition to that (even if they don't care) I think a home should be energy efficient and adapted to the environment in which it will live.

Again "imbalanced arrangement" is to vague to be useful. I own that book superjim, Ching is definitely proficient at archispeak other than that I don't see much merit in the book. I certainly don't see anything in it that would suggest this design is bad. If you do please point it out.

So far I am pleased with the crits. They have all been so vague it tells me that they have more to do with this not being the preferred ppb2 style than any real flaw in the design.


How does this house addapt to its environment? I don't see that at all. What does it have to do with its place? This looks like any house anywhere in the country. For one thing your blocky floor plan is not optimal for taking advantage of natural ventilation, which would be ideal for you climate in all but the hottest times of year.

This is certainly not the preferred style of this forum, which leads me to the question: why did you post this? You basically ignore all of the crits because in your mind they are not valid. So what is the point? Why bother posting something here that you know we will not like, then ignore any suggestions that are made. Most post here to get feedback and to improve their designs. This is obviously not your goal, so what are you trying to gain from this?

I think what gives us all collywobbles is very hard to describe.
It's not a 'hard fact' or rule that can be followed it's much more subtle.

That's why you might have difficulties to understand what the guys were trying to point out. I don't really know how to solve this issue as both partys are talking at cross purposes.

Tough one!

Again Michel, saying something is generous or not is pretty vague. What makes something generous? The portico (as I have already explained) is a client requirement. I know vaguely that tectonics has to do with space composition and also materials but without clear rules tectonics is useless to me as a design tool. I would have an easier time trying to design with Feng Shui (at least there is a lot written about it).

Hey, you won't find the recipe for a good project in an 'architecture cooking book' or 'architecture for dummies' with all the answers.

Design is about putting one function along with another. Function is the primary responsibility of the architect art is secondary.

Yeah, you're right... so why bother with the 'art' part of architecture. Keep the 'tecture' part if you can.

So far I am pleased with the crits. They have all been so vague it tells me that they have more to do with this not being the preferred ppb2 style than any real flaw in the design.

I'm sorry you seem unable to take any crit. Again, you must be right, we're not sharing the same sensibility in architecture...

lavardera, yes that is about right. What would you think if I made the same crit about your project? My guess is that you would think I don't know what I am talking about.

nicholas, I know you think it should be narrow and have better cross ventilation but I think I have already explained why that is not a good idea. As far as "defensive" goes, isn't it my responsibility to defend my design? It is also the critics responsibility to defend their crit. Just saying something is bad with no explanation why may be the norm in college but here it just doesn't cut it.

I'm one of the few people around here that is not close minded trogers. If I where unwilling to hear what you all have to say I wouldn't have started this thread in the first place. If I where ignoring opinions I would not have tied to make changes based on the response which I have done.

imasayer, please read the thread.

michel it is spelled architecture so the other part from tecture is archi :D

I don't exactly understand why me expecting you all to explain your crits in detail means that I can't "take any crit" You simply need to defend your ideas and give me more than vague "it doesn't feel right" comments in order for me to do anything about it.

I can say the clients are extremely pleased so my posting this has more to do with my interest in exploring architecture than anything.

I read the thread, and I don't think you have actually answered any of these questions. So you can dismiss my questions if you so choose, but you are making claims about environment and efficiency that you are simply not backing up. This house appears to be no more efficient than any other builder designed home. It is possible that your clients don't care enough to push those issues, but your first plans and images to not respond to the environment.

"Design is about putting one function along with another"

no it really is not. That was my point, as your program has expanded, you have just added things on and slotted things in, this is not design or architecture. architecture is about using knowledge, skill, craft and art to inform decisions during the process of design.

let me ask you this. could you sum up your strategy or approach to this design in a sentence or two?- that should be how simple an initial strategy is. or is it (as i suspect) a design born from having a brief and letting it spew out onto the page.

And PS, I was merely suggesting the book as a good reference for any design as you had mentioned a lack of "formal education". not as a criticism of the house.

imasayer,

"For one thing your blocky floor plan is not optimal for taking advantage of natural ventilation, which would be ideal for you climate in all but the hottest times of year."

This was addressed on page two.

"why did you post this?"

I answered that in my previous reply: "...so my posting this has more to do with my interest in exploring architecture than anything."

"Most post here to get feedback and to improve their designs."

and in fact I have made changes based on feedback.

"...but you are making claims about environment and efficiency that you are simply not backing up. This house appears to be no more efficient than any other builder designed home"

These types of statements are the reason I don't think you read the thread carefully imasayer or for that matter even know how to read a plan or know anything about energy efficiency. I'm sorry to continue to be negative about you. You don't actually design do you?


superjim, -"no it really is not" -yes superjim it really is

"let me ask you this. could you sum up your strategy or approach to this design in a sentence or two" - I just did a couple of posts ago.


Publishing a design for architect types to crit is something like throwing bloody fish into shark infested waters. There is sure to be a feeding frenzy. :rolleyes:

These types of statements are the reason I don't think you read the thread carefully imasayer or for that matter even know how to read a plan or know anything about energy efficiency. I'm sorry to continue to be negative about you. You don't actually design do you?


I read the thread as I stated before, I just don't feel that you gave clear answers to these questions. Because you don't think it matters is a poor excuse. (your comment on page 2)

Now that you mention it I am not sure I do know how to read a plan. I mean, I did not see anything in the plan to show me any reason to believe that you have thought about environment and efficiency. Please educate me. Show me where I am wrong.

I think that your personal attacks are an attempt to distract from the fact that there is nothing more efficient in this house than any other house currently being built, in spite of your claims to the contrary.

Chris, I was trying not to comment but here it goes.

I just don't see the spatial flow you describe in any of the plans. Every room is an individual space with no references to other places in the house. Some of the comments made earlier pertain to formal composition, or simply just how the house is arranged (plan, section and elevation). Typically a schematic idea is considered strong based on it's ability to keep all the program pieces together, organize and introduce some kind of design to the overall project.

Working with 45 geometries is a very complex way to begin a design project. Frank Lloyd Wright took geometry from nature and made it the organizing principle that would inform the entire design, and this is evident in plan (45 geometry of honeycomb shapes), section (natural lighting), elevation (materials and window patterns), etc.

I understand your passion for this project, but please take a moment to review your work. Ask yourself if this is the best solution for the client, are you imposing your taste beyond the client's understanding, is the plan the best solution for site, program requirements, adjacencies, furniture layout. And will the design cause an increase in overall maintenance to the building based on the angles and roof forms? What do the other houses in the neighborhood look like, will this one be so different it will not retain market value? Even FLLW had trouble with this.

Chris, I do applaud your work and your willingness to share it with the group. When I see a project like yours it automatically makes me question the origin and motive behind the design concept. In your case I'm not finding the source and that's my point, because without a driving source (especially for a residence) the end result typically falls short of the owner's initial intent. So please perhaps try something completely different and compare the schemes to outline strengths and weaknesses, this may only improve your current scheme and discover it's basis.

... just my 2 cents

Well sorry imasayer, your comments just irritated me.

"Because I don't think it matters" was only part of the answer I gave to almost the exact same question which nicholas had asked. If you have a specific point or disagree with anything that has already been discussed on that subject than say so and I will try and clarify my position. If you or anyone else are just here to make petty insults like my house is blocky, looks like a standard builders house, looks like your just stringing functions together, not gracious, etc.. with no helpful or thoughtful input than please leave.

Inarch, It is nice to finally get some more thoughtful comments. Yes I suppose I could start over but why would it be better and not just different? I don't have any more knowledge of tectonics than I did last week. I understand that I could have used a formal structure on the plan but would it actually make it better? It would certainly make the plan look nicer if it had the organization the front has but would it function better?

I can't say whether I am imposing my taste beyond my clients understanding. It would be hard to determine exactly what another person understands. You may need to clarify that concern for me to answer properly.

As far as the maintenance goes it is a relatively simple form. I don't see problem areas in the roof line. If there was no clearstory it would be a lot easier to build, and certainly nothing projecting out is easier than what I have.

I think this plan does a very good job of meeting the program requirements. I don't exactly know what you all want to see as far as "program" I could make a list of rooms like I have seen in other threads but I think it is pretty safe to assume that the basic functions and look of the house is a fairly good reflection of the clients ideas. For example, the portico is a very unusual element these days and you are not likely to see one unless the client specifically requested it.

I am surprised to hear questions of market value hear at ppb2 since most are not in the mainstream. Certainly the house is not the typical style being built here currently but it has fairly traditional look. I don't see a big problem. The site is 16 acres and has no visible houses close by.

Yes I or anyone else could endlessly explore options for any project. No doubt there are other ways it could have been done. Again I think it is a fair assumption that the basic elements I have presented so far are based on the clients needs and desires.

I don't think it does much good to question the clients desires here. (Like the thread House near Estoril, Portugal where everyone came in and criticized the placement of the kitchen) They want what they want. They don't often do what we want them to do.

That certainly does not mean my plan is perfect. Or that it isn't possible to meet their needs in a better way. I am still not quite understanding what the objection is. That I have a fairly rigid structure on the front and it is not reflected on the plan?

Chris, you don't need steer away from the traditional vernacular taste that you instictively like. You just have to think critically and simplify what you already have, including the plans. To me, they are doing too much.

You are trying to basically do more than necessary and call it modern, or give it some "environmental" tag, that really is more like a "decorate my house" approach - add some furniture, add some funk, typical of what an interior decorator would do. Here are some very traditionally styled house that have undergone a rigorous thought process in planning to end up looking beautiful.

If you want to design a house with a gable or hip roof, so be it. but make sure it is just one roof without doing too much like multiple adjoining roof planes. Do too much and you'll encounter environmental, maintenance problems. If you want to make windows, make sure that they are simple windows without doing too much. There is beauty in uncomplication.

I don't think it does much good to question the clients desires here. (Like the thread House near Estoril, Portugal where everyone came in and criticized the placement of the kitchen) They want what they want. They don't often do what we want them to do.

Chris, you make a good point here, it's a bit much for you to have to justify air-con or car ports in this thread. So lets all continue on teh basis that that is what is required.

But as I see it there are two problems with critiqueing your scheme. Firstly you only want very specific, very clear, very pragmatic 'instructional' critiques - move that wall over there or that showers not big enough. Secondly you are not prepared to review any of your decisions: you continually claim to belive that either you think it fullfills the clients brief of works well.

We could accept one of the above but with both there is really nothing much to say other than I like it or I don't. Hence the thread degenerates.

To offer a critique for rejection:
As I see it you've lost a couple of your original ideas and some of the clarity from your original plan:
1. separation of parking and living - the increased decks now join them up, you'll be sitting out in the porch and get suffocated as someone backs the car in there
2. the central fireplace around which the house was organised - weakened to the point of not working
3. the covered arcade bit at the front (actually much of the original model)

Why couldn"t you go back and review the design from the beginning? (other than of course real world concerns like time and money :P ).

Lastly the client is not the judge of whether the scheme is any good, a client will like pretty much anything you offer up, getting a new house is the thing. The people who judge it are you primarily and us, your peers.
:rock on:

more traditional houses...

Yes I agree spadestick those examples are simple and elegant. But they are not what the clients wanted, which where arts and crafts and prairie. I don't see any FLLW or Green and Green influence in those examples.

I have to have something more than "it doesn't feel right" gorgon. Your last comments illustrate why. Swanke suggested I make both sides more even without explaining the rationale behind that suggestion and I changed the plan to do that and now you are saying the change is actually worse than the original. Without increasing my knowledge I would just be making variations of bad plans.

I don't have any idea why I have had several comments that I am not open to suggestions. Gorgon and swanke are the only two people who have said anything more than "start over" or similar suggestions. In addition to addressing swankes concern I also worked on the master bedroom privacy issue and thickened the fascia as gorgon suggested.

As I said in my last post:
"That certainly does not mean my plan is perfect. Or that it isn't possible to meet their needs in a better way."

I did not suggest that because I know the clients the plan or the decisions I have made are beyond question. I just said as far as program goes you can assume that this is the sort of thing they want.

My comments were not meant as insults. I hoped that my questions would get you thinking about why you were doing things as you were.

I think at some point we have to agree to disagree. I don't like this house. I think that the composition is weak. (I am referring to proportions as well as some of the formal gestures) It is not responding to its place well, and is like a home I would find in my area. I don't think that you pushed the efficiency nearly as far as you could have. When it comes to issues of composition and proportion it is hard to be very specific. These issues are at a gut level. That is why many of the comments sound vague to you. Design to a certain extent is about the feeling and is hard to verbalize, but that does not make the critiques off base. I think the fact that many of us are responding the same way to this project should tell you something. It may just tell you that we are a bunch of pompous architects.

I do appreciate the fact that you have made an effort to respond to the sun. That is a great place to start. Even if I don't like the look of the house I am glad that you made this effort. While I don't like the look of the screened porches, they are a good idea, but maybe would have made more sense on the north or east side in this climate.

Chris, best of luck...

Just wonder what the client would think if they read this thread, it's unlikely but with all the information you are posting on this project through your website and flickr, they may find us non-"mainstreamers" and also start asking questions.

The clients have access to all information. They where wanting me to move forward with the project and start on the details but I told them that since their current house is not yet listed we have time to explore the design. I also told them I have been soliciting opinions from this forum and DC.

Contrary to what a few seem to think I have always been open to exploring options. More than any other real project ppb2 has. What some people don't understand is this is not a hypothetical project and I can't be expected to please this group, the DC group and the clients. Also I am not some name architect and the clients don't just walk in and say "make Architecture for me, here's a pile of money".

imasayer, I am fully aware that this isn't your cup of tea, it has been obvious in your attitude from the start. I don't know why you feel the need to tell me that. You seem to need to try and control other people. If you want me to "think" you need to ask a new question and or make thoughtful comments.

The screened porch is best sheltered from western sun and since the sun sets well north of west in the summer putting it on the north side would not work. Also You want some sun in the winter to make it a pleasant place at that time of year. It also needs to be situated for the prevailing summer wind.

While I think that michel is pompous I also think he is a good designer from what I have seen. On the other hand, I just don't think you know anything about architecture.

I keep waiting for you to explore this house design in section. Through this exercise I think that you'll discover that many of these spaces seem awkward and are lacking any strong experiential qualities. I know that there are clerestories in your design, but if you are using FLW and the Greenes as precedents you should really study how they manipulated volumes of space to evoke an emotional response.

A floor plan, or an elevation for that matter, exists only in two dimensions. The section offers the added elements of volume and space. The essence of a well designed home does not reside in square footage or the stitching together of the program, rather it is found in three dimensional space. This is a critical concept that separates most architects and designers from home builders. Architects have the section.

"Contrary to what a few seem to think I have always been open to exploring options. More than any other real project ppb2 has. What some people don't understand is this is not a hypothetical project and I can't be expected to please this group, the DC group and the clients. Also I am not some name architect and the clients don't just walk in and say "make Architecture for me, here's a pile of money".

What a load of bullshit. Show me another real project on this forum that doesn't have budget constraints.

You have posted your project and ignored most of the comments from the begining. You took a couple of suggestions, but you have never changed the look of the building based on what anyone has said. So how have you explored options? I have only seen slight variations of one option. You have said that you are here to learn, but all you do is defend your project. You don't seem to want to question it.

"imasayer, I am fully aware that this isn't your cup of tea, it has been obvious in your attitude from the start. I don't know why you feel the need to tell me that. You seem to need to try and control other people. If you want me to "think" you need to ask a new question and or make thoughtful comments."

Control? What are you talking about? I have asked you real questions, and you have refused to answer them.

"The screened porch is best sheltered from western sun and since the sun sets well north of west in the summer putting it on the north side would not work. Also You want some sun in the winter to make it a pleasant place at that time of year. It also needs to be situated for the prevailing summer wind."

Valid points. I agree with you.

While I think that michel is pompous I also think he is a good designer from what I have seen. On the other hand, I just don't think you know anything about architecture.

I'm not going to bother with this comment, because it is just an ignorant statement and it makes me feel a little sad for you.

Well adapt your correct I don't design from the section other than using it to work out structural issues and details. I am open to exploring this but I don't exactly know what you all want to see in this area. I do try to imagine the space as I work and occasionally I use the 3d capability of my CAD program to look at issues but never do complete renderings like I do for the exterior.

So if you will be more specific on things you want to see I will try and produce them.

You really expect me to explore every possible solution imasayer? There would be thousands of variations that would meet the clients requirements. I could spend years on this one project and like I said earlier, why should we expect the outcome to be substantially different? No one yet has given me a reason which would justify completely reworking the problem. If you see another real project around here that completely started over because you all told them it doesn't feel right please point it out. Especially one in which the clients are are very happy with the current state of the project. I'm already doing this extra effort for free and your comments are just wasting my time.

I don't think it was an ignorant statement. I don't see any work you have posted which would indicate otherwise and your statements so far about ventilation, the screened porch and the energy efficiency make it clear that you don't know what you are talking about. But I am wrong from time to time so if you want to point me to some of your work I will take a look so that I can make a more accurate assessment.

While I'm at it here is a front elevation.

If I wasn't so busy with 10 other projects at the office, I somehow feel the need to retrofit this unbuilt project, completely, to show what I mean. There's just so much stuff going on that it makes me dizzy. Arts and crafts can be re-interpreted in so many ways.

Look at Samuel Mockbee's (Rural Studio) work. You will understand how the vernacular was achieved and composed into fresh and extremely economical ways that included environmental aspects.

Where's my red liner?

Well adapt your correct I don't design from the section other than using it to work out structural issues and details. I am open to exploring this but I don't exactly know what you all want to see in this area. I do try to imagine the space as I work and occasionally I use the 3d capability of my CAD program to look at issues but never do complete renderings like I do for the exterior.

So if you will be more specific on things you want to see I will try and produce them.

You really expect me to explore every possible solution imasayer? There would be thousands of variations that would meet the clients requirements. I could spend years on this one project and like I said earlier, why should we expect the outcome to be substantially different? No one yet has given me a reason which would justify completely reworking the problem. If you see another real project around here that completely started over because you all told them it doesn't feel right please point it out. Especially one in which the clients are are very happy with the current state of the project. I'm already doing this extra effort for free and your comments are just wasting my time.

I don't think it was an ignorant statement. I don't see any work you have posted which would indicate otherwise and your statements so far about ventilation, the screened porch and the energy efficiency make it clear that you don't know what you are talking about. But I am wrong from time to time so if you want to point me to some of your work I will take a look so that I can make a more accurate assessment.

I am done with you. You are not here to learn anything. You are here to strike up controversy. Good luck on your house. Hope it goes really well, just like any other run of the mill project.

well thanks imasayer, I am relieved you finally got the hint.

I enjoyed reading about Samuel Mockbee's (Rural Studio) spadestick.

http://archrecord.construction.com/features/aiaAwards/04mockbee-1.asp

He was truly an inspirational person. I'll have to put the book on my buy list.

Certainly we would all like to have clients who would appreciate a more innovative approach to design and building.

here are the remainder of the elevations:

Your rooflines on the front elevation are working against you. Where you want to express the entry you've got 4 different gable roofs that only serve to clutter things up. Also, the way that one gable dies into the other roof pitch on the left side is a little akward. I'll be honest I haven't looked at your plan to see if there might be a better solution, maybe this is the best way to do it. Just wanted you to be aware that what others have been saying about the plan being needlessly complex is being reflected in the roof.

I don't want to contribute to the pissing contest this thread has turned into, just trying to give you an honest opinion about specific elements of the design like you have been asking. Not saying you should start over, just seems like the roof is doing too much at this point.

cvankley, I am not quite following your comments. There may be some terminology differences, I only have one gable on the front from my understanding of what a gable is. Is it possible that you are looking at the rear elevation in that last set of three?



Listen everyone else, surely you must all understand how irritating it is for half a dozen people to come by and make unhelpful crits. If I did the same thing to you all I think you would feel the same way.

As far as I know architecture isn't a "gut feeling" and it is not mysticism. If you think you have knowledge to share than do so. Expecting me to just start over because you say I need to is a completely unreasonable request and I don't think anyone else in real projects would do so in my place.

I find it pretty hard to believe that if these people had come to most of you wanting this style of house you would not try and provide it. Is that what you all are saying? Or that you would be able to do a modern interpretation and get the clients to accept it?

Almost none of the people making crits here has produced any work of their own that I have seen. You all actually expect me to respect someones opinion when they have not produced any work which would earn that respect?

If I went to tdmc's project and told him I that I feel like he needs to start over because I say so what do you think his reaction would be?

I have been polite to everyone who has made an effort to be helpful and polite to me. The people who come in and just want to criticize with no better solution to offer are just being rude.

The animosity the staff and others here at ppb2 display on a regular basis is quite strange to me. What good does it do to make others feel bad? I've been attacked since day one here and I think it is completely unnecessary.

I can understand why each person would believe their work is better than others because that is the way people think but it is hard for me to understand not liking all styles of architecture. That would be like a musician only liking one style of music.

Furthermore, while I am under no illusion that my work is perfect, I do find it hard to believe that there is no merit whatsoever in this project and it needs to be completely started over.

If any of you believe you can do better than I challenge you to do so.
I have laid out the program. Prairie, Arts & Crafts, Frank LLoyd Wright, hot humid climate, 30.44 lat., the types of spaces and functions I have included. You can start from scratch or I would be happy to share the dxf or dwg file.
Maybe I can get the clients to judge and pick the winner. Maybe we could even do a little cash prize.

Here are my latest ideas on the floorplan:

Chris, the comment on the roof was make earlier as well. I also agree with cvankley's observation regarding the 4 roof lines. Essentially the first gable is over the potico, the second set is a split gable over the living space, and then a fourth, being the offset gable with the circular window.

cvankley didn't offer a solution, but just thought it didn't look right, and I also agree. You obviously differ with everyone's comments, so perhaps the enthusiasm to offer you suggestions has diminished.

Based on your latest plan, the master bedroom seems small. There isn't must space for additional furniture or a seating arrangement to take advantage of the bay window. Why did you change the window to a bow verses the 45 like the porch?

Also think you could do a nice 45 corner for the tub in the master bath and really get the tub feeling like it's outside (very FLLW).

Chris, thanks for sticking through your process and posting your progress, not everyone will agree with your design, but then again there is no right or wrong when it comes to design, just ideas!

Chris, I can understand how you might get frustrated with people making comments who you may see as unqualified to do so. I would just say that this forum is a place for us to discuss and grow our appreciation and ability to create architecture.

I think some of your frustration stems from the you not having gone to architecture school. I am not saying this as an "I'm better than you" response, what I'm getting at is that in architecture school students get used to defending their designs against professors who will question all aspects of the project, and usually not neccessarily in a respectful manner. I think this kind of helps to thicken our skin to criticism, which maybe you aren't as used to. That is also why people here are making frank comments about your project, because that is how we discuss projects in the studio setting. In this thread I see that as a point of disconnect between yourself and most of the people commenting. I think a little understanding of both sides perspectives would help all of us in making the thread more constructive.

Anyway that's my rant, as for the roof comments I made, inarch basically clarified what I was thinking. If you'd like to see what I personally have been working on go to: http://www.solar.gatech.edu/ , since it is a competiton between schools we can't release the design yet, but that should give you some idea of where my efforts and concerns are currently.

I am glad you are making an effort to stick with the postings Chris, hopefully some good will come out of all this in the end.

Chris, you've come to an international forum. You have to accept the fact that there is bound to be international opinion. You're looking at a general consensus of opinions from people around the world, experienced and inexperienced alike - and what is the result? Their opinions and comments are trying to inform you that there is something obviously wrong with the design that you've presented.

Very few people in the world appreciate country music and bluegrass. Hot and humid climate? I personally live in a very hot and very humid climate 12 hours in front of your time zone and the opposite side of the world. In fact more than half the world's populations live in hot and humid climates. I don't think anybody here is targetting style as the criteria for the outcome.

As so many people have pointed out - there is something fundamentally wrong with the plans and elevations outright from the start, and either we're all internationally wrong and rude idiots and you're right. or you're wrong.

I think that it stems from the possiblilty that you are taking run-of-the-mill builder's home plans and modifying them to suit your client's requirements.

An experienced architect / builder would do it differently if they sought improvement to whatever they were doing. improvement not just in aesthetics, but in function, consolidation and cost savings.

eg. The architect who considered cost savings as a prime objective would look to the market that builders transcend in and use primarily what they normally use, including the sizings of the cheapest elements and then compose it into something artful, kind of like what Samuel Mockbee does.

eg. The experience builder who wants to achieve something more than run-of-the-mill 100 home plans for $25, will study a great master architect, even to the extent of copying the plans exactly, and within his building experience and knowledge, carry it out with current methods of construction and material assembly.

Chris, it's not just a matter of taste. I strongly believe being an architect is about questionning. Questionning not for only the sake of questionning, but questionning for the sake of understanding what our built environnement is about. No matter you're not a 'graduate' architect, this is about our common interest in space, form... and architecture... :D I do understand we all have a background which is hard to get rid off, aesthetically speaking. If you want to pratice the 'art' of architecture, you have to master the art of spaces like a musician would do with the basical do-re-mi-fa before composing a fifth symphony... In other words, your job is to offer something better than the so-called "run-of-the-mill builder's home plans", well, as long as you believe there is something better to offer to your client... For instance, I haven't seen one single post about the surrounding environnement (except of the site plan in the very beginning of this thread)... and looking to your plan, it seems that this is no relevant point in your project. When I previously said that the 'screened porch' was the only 'generous' gesture in the project, I thought it was, maybe, the only element related to its site. Once again, even if I repeat myself over and over again, practising architecture is asking yourself why, why and why again. Why am I setting the house this way on the site? Why am I drawing such roofs? Why am I putting bedrooms on the right and parking space on the left? etc etc etc... You'll see, keep on practizing this exercise, and you'll soon end up with 'what is architecture all about'? That's generally the time you understand you're on the right track :D

As far as I know architecture isn't a "gut feeling" and it is not mysticism. If you think you have knowledge to share than do so. Expecting me to just start over because you say I need to is a completely unreasonable request and I don't think anyone else in real projects would do so in my place.


Yes some of it is as far as design and concept development. That is what makes everyone unique in how they approach a design problem or challenge. Some of these "gut feelings" are also based on understanding and knowledge. For instance the way a facade looks and how it is composed. I think the crit on the elevations you showed us are rooted in some of that. There is a lack of balance and something that just doesn't feel right. We all deal with that in our own designs and we work those things out through a process of sketches and models and so forth. sometimes its an easy fix and very easy to explain, and sometimes it isn't.

What I find that I do not like in you design so far is that there is a hint of a prairie style going on (I think someone commented on that) but it isn't something that has translated well with form and plan. On that note I am curious as to what precedents of FLW you have taken a look at? And if you are working also with an "arts & crafts" style too what has been your influence on this?

This "arts & crafts" has become a new marketing thing in single family homes in my area and it cracks me up. There are hints of this style but in the end the homes are still production pieces and do not reflect at all to the methodologies and craft that the true "arts & crafts" are.

That being said I think you have to look at what made the good examples of "arts & craft" successful and how you can make that happen in your design. The type of construction and the expression of connections would be one thing to look at. From what I have seen there are hints of this but I still feel that you can make this better in how it is expressed in the design.


Almost none of the people making crits here has produced any work of their own that I have seen. You all actually expect me to respect someones opinion when they have not produced any work which would earn that respect?


You need to keep in mind Chris that many on this forum work for firms who would not be happy with them sharing their firms work. So that prevents many of PPB'ers from doing just that. But most of us who have gone through school and are working in the industry most likely have valid experience and from who I know from who has been critical of you design are worthy of the comments they have made and can back them up with experience. I think you are being foolish to even challenge that.

For the record...

Imasayer's cabin design (http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums//showthread.php?t=269) as just one example of work.

Then we have Lavadera's house design (http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=440) that was even published in Dwell magazine.

Just to name a couple

Oh yeah I didn't realize that was imasayers project, I had looked at that a long time ago. That wasn't bad work I enjoyed the thread. Not on the same level of difficulty that my project is on. Perhaps I was to harsh with imasayer, he just happened to be the one who pushed me past my limit. Both his and lavardaras work are conveniently in the ppb2 preferred style and thus did not take any serious crits. Also greg didn't crit he just asked a question. Neither project is in the requested style.

Well I had excluded cvankley comments from the type of comments I was addressing because he was making an effort to point out a specific element and say something about it.


spadestick: "I think that it stems from the possiblilty that you are taking run-of-the-mill builder's home plans and modifying them to suit your client's requirements."


leave this thread spadestick. I won't except that type of BS.

The owners came with one book titled New Arts & Crafts Houses by: Neill Heath for their only inspiration. He has seen several FLLW homes in the Chicago area, she did not seem very enthusiastic about his work. The houses in the book where the typical architect interpretations you see today.

Things I think I borrowed from FLLW are the more formal front, the long row of clearstory windows, the screened porch shape, the built-in bench seating. He also tended to arrange all bedrooms in one wing instead of the more common split arrangement we tend to see today and of coarse the open plan.

Yes I know what is being called Arts & Crafts these days. What you get when you blend these styles together is a house that is a combination of all. Seriously, I think even my blended in Arts & Crafts is more Arts & Crafts than what builders are producing. I will also be designing several sets of art glass for the project. She just finished a stained glass workshop.

There are several reasons I changed the 45 deg windows to bow. Gorgons comment on privacy, the realization that (although it would suit me because I like natural ventilation) the clients never or rarely open windows. Also I felt they where not completely happy with that solution and they do like the new layout better. It also cuts down on the total window area a bit. I am not real happy about the master bedroom or the fireplace and screen porch corners of the living room. I am trying to work on those areas and come up with a better solution.

I have a policy when it comes to respect. I try and show people respect, unless I don't get any in return. I don't see how asking people to justify their crits and explain their reasoning as being disrespectful, stubborn or a bad attitude.

Is that what you all are really used too? You all just bashed your fellow students work without any reason other than you didn't like it? I can certainly see where the professors would not have time to justify their opinion to every single student but that was a matter of expediency I would think. I would at least expect them to have tried to actually teach why something was not good not just say "that's bad do it over" Is it any wonder more people won't post their projects here if this is what they can expect?

Architecture is not served by making other people feel bad. If you think this house can both be simpler and more Arts & Crafts than you will need to tell me how because I don't see it. I am open to ideas but just saying something is bad is not a valid idea. Everything I have changed so far has been criticized by someone else so I am not sure there is any way for me to ever make this a "good" house here at ppb2.

Things I think I borrowed from FLLW are the more formal front, the long row of clearstory windows, the screened porch shape, the built-in bench seating. He also tended to arrange all bedrooms in one wing instead of the more common split arrangement we tend to see today and of coarse the open plan.

Chris, it is the process that we are concerned with. It is the "whys" and the "how comes" that I am not fully connecting point A to point B. Why did you choose to "borrow" these specific elements? There is more to the style than a "formal front" and the shape of the screened porch (which seems more rustic or mountain than prairie). The long row of clerestory windows lends itself well to the space...how does it impact yours (section, interior elevations, or model)? The only thing I will perhaps give you is the built in seating, but there are many styles that incorporate built in seating...

I'm sure there is more to it than you say here, but you tend to withhold information and then say more later. Like, for instance, this latest post. You should have started your entire discussion with "why I chose these elements from these architectural styles". And, you are making claims but only showing plans and the occasional exterior model/elevations. Perhaps a model or interior elevations/sections will help inform you of other decisions or pending areas of difficulty?

Is that what you all are really used too? You all just bashed your fellow students work without any reason other than you didn't like it? I can certainly see where the professors would not have time to justify their opinion to every single student but that was a matter of expediency I would think. I would at least expect them to have tried to actually teach why something was not good not just say "that's bad do it over" Is it any wonder more people won't post their projects here if this is what they can expect?

i think what needs to be said about this project had been said many times over. if you don't get it, then you just don't get it.

i think everyone have been very generous in even attempting to explain to you what your design problems are but you fail to acknowledge it. so be it.

every once in a while someone like you pop up on this forum and cause a stir because you can't handle how honest critiques (and i believe it has been respectful) in architecture has been given. people only started getting frustrated once you start behaving like you have been for this thread.

i personally don't feel you have taken on any of the critiques to better the fundamentals of this design and i think it's time to close this thread as it is going no where.

good luck

I don't understand your problem swank. Do you not see that I made changes based on your comments? Even though you choose not to elaborate on what tectonics actually is or what I need to do to go about using it.

Gorgon gave a few ideas which I worked with also and that is about all the ideas which have been suggested in enough detail for me to do much with so far.

Adapt asked for a section which I provided and I asked him to explain more about what he expects since I don't normally work with sections at this stage.

Inarch pointed out that the master bedroom could work better and I agreed that is an area that could use more work.

I was even trying to work with spadesticks inappropriate references until he crossed the line of being civil.

There is a current bit of discussion on the roof line that I am willing to explore but so far I have not heard any detailed suggestions. I suppose I could just start making changes but It is already shown that any changes I make are as likely to be criticized as the original.

Yes trodgers I would like to stay on subject and just talk about this design and how it might be improved. I will ask one more time.

If anyone does not have an appropriate, relevant or helpful comment to make concerning this project please don't waste space by posting here.


I'm trying to add in a little FLLW feel and not copy him wholesale. Like I said she did not seem that enthusiastic about his work. It is generally better to lean towards the wifes side than the husbands when making compromises in my experience.

The Boomer House in Phoenix Arizona had a fairly similar structure to the screened porch. I don't have any method other than I borrowed the things which I could use. The use of some clearstory was a specific request and that element lead my initial design ideas.


How the clearstory impacts other elements, again I'm not sure how to answer that. I have done some work in the study and entry areas which balanced the windows better in the interior. I applied a reduction formula to the window spacing so that the distance between them gets progressively smaller as they move away from center which worked with the inside and I think with the portico sticking out so far as well. I added some windows to the inside back wall of the office that I would like to use art glass in and which will be lined up to let light from the front clearstory into the living room area.

It may appear that I am withholding information but actually I just don't know what you all want me to say about anything until you ask. Then I give the best answer I can and often ask for clarification which sometimes I get and sometimes I don't get.

I had considered not projecting the roof out over the bathroom bow. I have a bay window on my own house that I just kept under the main roof but in hindsight I wish I had spent a little extra money to keep the same overhang because it is not as well protected from the sun and rain. Otherwise I could take out that roof projection.

here is a roof plan

Chris,

I know I was a little vague about how you might improve the roofline in my comment. I would like to take some time and sketch over the last drawings you posted to see if I can come up with something that you can clearly see. You'll have to bear with me, I'm working thru finals here in grad school this week, but I will take a crack at it when I get some time.

Also, and this is probably repeating what others have said....but this type of feedback, that questions aspects of the design but does not neccessarily provide a concrete answer to those questions, is typical of this forum. If you look at the other hypothetical and pre-design threads much of the same thing is going on. I think this occurs because architects are trained to be critical thinkers, so often posters will try to bring a problem to your attention and then let you work thru it on your own, emphasizing the process as much as the final product.

I can't say I won't be surprised if this thread gets closed.....the differences in communication just seem to be making it impossible to make any progress, if you have been open to doing so from the start.

The only reason I am in the back to the drawing board section is because I did not get a three star rating. This is not a hypothetical project and like everyone else in real projects I have real clients that have real desires so I am limited to what I can do.

Time is not a big issue right now. The clients have not yet listed their current house for sell and the market is a bit slow this year. Even if you all don't have time to draw your ideas out I at least need some sort of ideas of where to go.

The best opportunity to simplify the roof lines seems to me to be on the back side. Here I have straightened the back wall and moved it out two feet. I could probably rework the master suite to fit this. Is this better?

Ok you all seem to be insisting I start from scratch. And I think it will be an interesting exercise even if it never gets built.

This was my core idea. You all should have a good idea of the requirements and tastes of the clients based on my previous work.

The wife likes to cook and my initial thought was to make the kitchen the hub. some clearstory is a must. they want an open plan, the reason my clearstory is not even is that it is taller in the back so that I can bring in controlled solar gain for winter heating.

Chris, it's not only the 3 star, it's because we all "feel" you should take a closer look at this rather significant project of yours. And since your project schedule is not binding your efforts, then again you should take another look.

Now, before you respond to this with more information. STOP. We don't want to see your next step. Give yourself time to sit back and really look at your work, do some redesign (yes, you do need to redesign some parts) and then, maybe in a month or whenever you are ready, give us all another shout with your latest and greatest.

Seriously, we are only trying to help and also have similar projects needing resolution. Next time please adjust your tone and be more receptive of the comments. You have made plenty of remarks on this thread that were not about your project, and moreover fired up some rivalry. That is not a productive way of asking for help.

These are just my comments, I do not speak or represent the forum, but I assure you others are in agreement...

...just my 2 cents

Thread closed.

Take 2 of this project starts HERE (http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6059)