• Hi all and welcome to TheWoodHaven2 brought into the 21st Century, kicking and screaming! We all have Alasdair to thank for the vast bulk of the heavy lifting to get us here, no more so than me because he's taken away a huge burden of responsibility from my shoulders and brought us to this new shiny home, with all your previous content (hopefully) still intact! Please peruse and feed back. There is still plenty to do, like changing the colour scheme, adding the banner graphic, tweaking the odd setting here and there so I have added a new thread in the 'Technical Issues, Bugs and Feature Requests' forum for you to add any issues you find, any missing settings or just anything you'd like to see added/removed from the feature set that Xenforo offers. We will get to everything over the coming weeks so please be patient, but add anything at all to the thread I mention above and we promise to get to them over the next few days/weeks/months. In the meantime, please enjoy!

Keep this one to yourselves.

9fingers":2zt76cd4 said:
I wonder if you might be best steering away from curved windows- not just on cost grounds
There could be a focussing type problem as experienced by the "walkie Talkie" building in London and also when viewing through adjacent panes, the view could be non continuous due to lens effects. This would make the view jump in steps as the observer passed each frame section.

Bob
Click to expand...

Well, I've done my best. I've been pointing our the issues of the upstairs windows from day one. I have tried umpteen variations on flat pieces of glass, probably 5 or 10 for every one shown on here. I have drawn up their own ideas (none of which could work). They have done the research and come up with the curved glass thing, so I'll give it a go. I don't think they've yet understood all the implications, despite me advocating flat glazing from the beginning for a variety of reasons.
 
How does all this design work get paid? Are you on an hourly rate or do the clients pay for each new drawing or is it just a lump sum on completion? Not trying to pry and I don't want to know the details but each one of these drawings/renderings cannot be cheap to produce.
 
Mike G":372qymfp said:
9fingers":372qymfp said:
I wonder if you might be best steering away from curved windows- not just on cost grounds
There could be a focussing type problem as experienced by the "walkie Talkie" building in London and also when viewing through adjacent panes, the view could be non continuous due to lens effects. This would make the view jump in steps as the observer passed each frame section.

Bob
Click to expand...

Well, I've done my best. I've been pointing our the issues of the upstairs windows from day one. I have tried umpteen variations on flat pieces of glass, probably 5 or 10 for every one shown on here. I have drawn up their own ideas (none of which could work). They have done the research and come up with the curved glass thing, so I'll give it a go. I don't think they've yet understood all the implications, despite me advocating flat glazing from the beginning for a variety of reasons.
Click to expand...


OK Apologies Mike - not trying to teach Grandma.....

The customer is always right - as long as the designer covers his backside :lol:

I spent all my working life at the research end of an R&D organisation. Sometimes we just had to build a mock up of the customers ideas to prove to them that the laws of physics can rarely be broken.

Bob
 
Andyp":17e4onjf said:
How does all this design work get paid? Are you on an hourly rate or do the clients pay for each new drawing or is it just a lump sum on completion? Not trying to pry and I don't want to know the details but each one of these drawings/renderings cannot be cheap to produce.
Click to expand...

I gave them a lump-sum figure for the two packages: Planning, and Working Drawings/ Building Regs. I allowed for a lot of design work in the Planning phase. I won't be administering the contract, so there is no fee for that. The guy who is doing the rendering of my models gave them (direct) an estimate for his work, and we're still within that budget. He just updates every now and then ("We're up to about £X").
 
9fingers":xjj59m7t said:
......OK Apologies Mike - not trying to teach Grandma.....
Click to expand...

I didn't construe it that way at all, so no need for apologies. :)
 
Mike G":3o7c7s59 said:
Andyp":3o7c7s59 said:
How does all this design work get paid? Are you on an hourly rate or do the clients pay for each new drawing or is it just a lump sum on completion? Not trying to pry and I don't want to know the details but each one of these drawings/renderings cannot be cheap to produce.
Click to expand...

I gave them a lump-sum figure for the two packages: Planning, and Working Drawings/ Building Regs. I allowed for a lot of design work in the Planning phase. I won't be administering the contract, so there is no fee for that. The guy who is doing the rendering of my models gave them (direct) an estimate for his work, and we're still within that budget. He just updates every now and then ("We're up to about £X").
Click to expand...

BTW, my fees are dwarfed by those of the structural engineer on this job.
 
There has been a lot of evolution of this project, and we're nearly there now with the design. Just a couple of decisions still to make, and in particular, a choice for what crowns the whole building. I prefer the subtler version with the tilted disc, but my clients like the Sydney Opera House version. I think it's too tall.

Anyway, we have brought the basement half a storey out of the ground, and made it circular, put the guest bedrooms down there, and given the entirety of the top floor over to a single master suite, open plan. The roof windows have all been calmed down a bit, and the roof, instead of sitting on the lower frame, now overhangs everything and sweeps down to the ground. There are a couple of nice little architectural "jokes" to keep everyone amused, one of which you can't really see in these images.......but I'll let you guess anyway:).

Note the underground garage (well, strictly, earth-bermed, not underground).

5Z8maJE.png

3g2ZY2w.png

cGs3C8D.png

M93UzVF.png

And the alternative crown:

VFyhgBh.png

kTbAoAO.png
 
I'm with your clients, I'm afraid, Mike. The second version looks like a helipad!
 
Tusses":16l6gaho said:
....as the the Opera house .. I see it more like an Oast House type top
Click to expand...

Yep, that's the rationale on the Design and Access Statement. But it's a bit post-hoc (we came up with the shape, then realised what it looked a bit like).
 
I'm with the client on the top as well Mike.

But whilst it looks very nice overall, the problem for me is that I saw the original design which I think is much better. I appreciate that raising up half a storey is probably much better practically but for me personally it is a step backwards aesthetically. Still I am not paying for it and nor will I live in it so I guess I look at it through an idealised lens, I guess the design process must be all about taking a pure concept and making it work on a day-to-day basis for the ultimate owner.

For me though there is one thing that absolutely needs to be sorted, that little balcony in the roof which I guess serves the master suite. I'm afraid it looks to my eye rather like it was installed by the local loft conversion outfit.

Terry.
 
Any progress on this Mike..?

My view, for what it's worth, I like the opera house option. The disc looks to me like an airfield air traffic control tower.

Cheers
Mark
 
There's a Planning Application in at the moment, with the Sydney Opera House version. I doubt we'll get permission initially, but we've got a chance at appeal.
 
Things have moved on......

hokfHaK.png

UexEhqF.png

2sSz0W5.png

There are no longer any straight lines anywhere on the exterior of the building. We're about to resubmit the Planning Application having withdrawn the last one to absorb their comments. That was a pre-planned ploy.
 
I was wondering about this one ! ...

it is a fascinating design task .

My 1st thoughts of the new top, is it looks like one of those spinney chimeny tops ? sorry ..

Can't wait to see more progress though :-)
 
Tusses":3mwu3f6s said:
......My 1st thoughts of the new top, is it looks like one of those spinney chimeny tops ? sorry .. ....
Click to expand...

Sorry? That's exactly what it was supposed to make you think. The rationale for this building is movement (it's on the site of an old long-gone windmill), and making something else look like it is about to burst into rotation was the whole idea. You'll never read it that way from ground level, though, because you'll see so little of it.
 
The top reminds me of onion domes I saw in St Petersberg. Just needs some gold leaf and a point on top.

It's a shame it has lost the simplicity of the original shape but it will still be a stunning building.
 
It's put on some Christmas weight! :lol:

I like it Mike, both have their different merits, probably like the first one more but like this very much too.

So when does it go back to planners and when can we expect to see you locking horns with Kevin McCloud? ;)

Cheers
Mark
 
Grand Designs don't accept proposals for filming until they have Planning Permission. The producers have asked us to inform them as soon as we've achieved that. We resubmit in the next couple of weeks, all being well. Personally, I expect us to fail at this level, but win on Appeal, so it might not get permission for about a year. It will take up to a year to do all the working drawings and calcs, and to get the glulam beams designed and into production. So I can't see us breaking ground for 2 years, and therefore Kevin Mcloud won't be involved until about 2019, for transmission 2020/ 21.
 
I was wondering what was happening with this...

Looks mega Mike, for some reason I can see the Teletubbies living in it. I like it. Are there any renders of the inside? Or is it too early?

Out of interest, have any other roof treatments be considered? The red tiles are good but I'd be interested to see it in a different colour or more unusual texture.

Jim
 
Thanks Jim. The roof tiles are the local standard handmade clay plain tiles. Part of the story here is to build with vernacular materials in an unusual way. One of the things this project has to do is advance local design (another box to tick), and our argument is that we are doing that by using very local products in ways in which they haven't been used before. We had an early conversation about using sheet materials such as zinc or copper but quickly came to the conclusion that tiles were best. The tiles can be sourced from a brickyard less than 3 miles away, dug from the ground right there, and fired using timber from the local wood.

The client doesn't want to pay for any images of the interior. They already know how great it will look! :eusa-dance:
 
I'm thinkin' that one of these guys is the client:
maxresdefault.jpg


scar.jpg


hugo-drax-in-and-quot-moonraker-and-quot-photo-u1.jpg


I'm not quite sure, but I'm going to put my money on this Ernst:
NIP000001102881_891114b.jpg


Kirk, speculating...
 
:lol: :lol: Very good Kirk! :lol: :lol:

Mike, I've just caught up... I wish you all the very best with Planning on this one chap! It will be an 'awesome' project to bring into reality. The design in my opinion is a testament to your creative imagination and talents. Good show chap - good show! :eusa-clap:

:text-bravo:
 
Thanks Paul.

-

Just gauging reaction. These are exactly the same shape as the previous cap, but just open sculptural ribs:

FirVpet.png

X9etSGu.png

Ted23lR.png

9lRGFeS.png

And a version in stainless steel:

6APz5A5.png

I wonder if a tubular stainless steel version would look better?
 
Seeing it transparent I'm wondering if it needs to be there at all?

Looks better without it. Maybe a glass version?
 
I like the steel one, and like my chimney spinner, would glint beautifully in the sunshine!

Is it supposed to be an actual room in the spec or just to let light in and you're playing with ideas?

Cheers
Mark
 
I prefer the SS ribs to the spinney . The oast house was ok too ...

which ever way you look at it, it's the only part of the house that people are having negative reactions too !
 
I've just been back through the thread to see the evolution of the design and finding myself liking the earlier ones better.
The central feature that looked like the hub of a propeller was good as was the one with 360 degree windows as a viewing gallery. Stating that the top will have no function seems a great shame.

I just cant see what the latest open frame is meant to represent. If the building were intended to look like a flower, then the top could be stamens but I can't resolve the propeller shape with the latest top section ideas.

Is there something I'm missing?

Bob
 
I watched "The worlds most extraordinary Homes" BBC last night which featured a house built into the side of a Spanish cliff with an amazing curved roof.
Built from reinforced concrete with handmade zinc tiles making it look like a dragon's skin.
When I was a university I did a thesis on shell roofs based on the ideas of Pier Luigi Nervi. Tested loads of thin slabs reinforced with chicken wire. The maths used was awful!!
Well worth a view on iPlayer if you didn't see it though Caroline Quintin's comments grate at times.

Rod
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top