Archinect
anchor

Opinions on house design

billygoat

New to the forum and would love some opinions on our elevations.

We concentrated on our floor plans over our outside design and when our architect posted the elevations, we were a bit underwhelmed. We've been busy trying out different looks and have made some progress but are still not fully satisfied. Would love some opinions from you all (sorry for the rough edits, our guy is away until the end of the month and we have a time crunch on our hands)

It's a traditional mountain home with modern elements, in a mountain town with strict height restrictions so we're limited to the middle roof line for height, without burying the suite in the basement. 

Here's a look at the floorplan:

The front elevation we found unattractive so we've been working at alternatives. 

Original:

Option 1:

Option 2:

The rear was okay but underwhelming and didn't provide the large open vault from upstairs with a high flat roof over the dining area (centre) and a vault over the living room (left). Kitchen is on the right with a bedroom above. We're fairly happy with the alternative rear elevation that we've come up with but are open to all discussion. 

Original:

Option 1:

Thanks in advance!

 
May 18, 17 3:07 pm
senjohnblutarsky

You lost me at traditional mountain house.... I don't think I would use that term to describe the layout. 

Now, I am going to let my inner grouch come out.  You should never design without knowing your assembly.  Cladding is part of the assembly.  You shouldn't just be slapping materials on wherever the hell you feel like it. There should have been a plan.  The wall thickness required by a masonry veneer should have an effect on the size and proportion of things. 

I can't say I have a clue what drove any of the decisions here. 

Why do we get different treatments for the barge rafters at different locations? 

And windows... Did we just decide to use the whole damn catalog? 

May 18, 17 3:30 pm
billygoat

The floorplan worked out really well for what we need and we started with that. Unfortunately to make an exterior that'll match the floor plan, we're stuck with a design that doesn't appeal to us.

We will definitely change up the treatments, windows, cladding, color, etc. to make a better appearance once we have the right bones to work with but we can't seem to get the bones sorted out enough to worry about sorting out the minor details.

Does your architect know you've posted his intellectual property to an internet forum? If I was him I'd be speed-dialing my lawyer.

As a great many architects use this forum anonymously he'll probably find out sooner than later.

May 18, 17 4:01 pm
billygoat

Thanks for the warning, didn't think that it'd be a concern to share rough plans, especially ones that are completely altered. Unfortunately this forum won't allow you to edit or delete posts and somehow still holds the image even though the link has been disabled?

shellarchitect

looks like a classic "snout house" to me.

The revisions are essentially different shades of lipstick on a pig.  Would not be allowed to build such a thing in my neck of the woods.  Without seeing the site I can't say what your options are.  

I think you might be better off having a serious conversation with your architect about what you really want.  If he can't deliver than look for someone else.  

I don't know what the time crunch is, my advice is not to rush what is probably the biggest purchase of your life.  

May 18, 17 4:13 pm

/\ yes, do that

billygoat

I agree. I think the issue is that we started from the inside out and now are discovering that the out, is not at all what we were after. The floorplan is the most functional and desirable that we've seen but for the floor plan to work, you have to have the "snout house" exterior. I hate to think about starting over but you're right about taking our time.

jla-x

Any decent designer/architect should be thinking of the whole and the details simultaneously. The inside and outside do not get designed independently.

jla-x

Sometimes its easier to start over than to force something that isn't working.

shellarchitect

btw - the double height living room is something that really bugs the crap out of me.  Its a incredible waste to create an uncomfortable space.  Put a floor in and you've made a substantial increase in your sq. ft. for a small increase in construction budget . 

Not to mention that you will have a more human scaled living room.  A room that is taller than it is wide/long is not going to feel right.

May 18, 17 4:20 pm
billygoat

Good point, the weird reality is that vaults are cheap and not considered much in pricing however adding floor and increasing the square footage, boosts the price the same as if you're adding to nothing. I don't understand it but that's how everything is priced here. I grew up in an A-Frame and have always loved the open feel and the expansive views from both floors.

chigurh

mc house

May 18, 17 4:25 pm
Non Sequitur

It needs more of those stupid L shape windows.

That'll be $300 please.

May 18, 17 4:26 pm

Idiot, you shouldn't tell them anything until you get the retainer.

billygoat

Too late, there are L's everywhere and it looks fantastic! :0

( o Y o )

Just out of curiosity, what does this level of design cost now? I'm reminded of the Craigslist draftsman who charged $0.07 per square foot.

May 18, 17 4:36 pm
randomised

It needs more cowbell.

May 18, 17 5:07 pm
billygoat

Tried that it didn't help

chris-chitect

I hate the two bedroom door frames that are on a 45 degree angle, and the sight-line to the back of someone's head sitting at the dining table when you walk in the front door.

May 18, 17 5:22 pm
billygoat

I get the sight line issue but would your eye not be drawn more to the large vaulted ceiling and large windows looking at the mountains than the table?

please, no

May 18, 17 6:01 pm
MyDream

I would suggest some visuals for the project to give better understanding of options. A visual can give you a better sight of color options and color schemes. A good color scheme can bring a bad design to a good one and a good design to a great one. Also about the site and sun path to see how is the sun going to enter the home and you can better place windows that way as well.

May 18, 17 6:09 pm
billygoat

Good point

Volunteer

First, which way is north? What is the path of the sun through the seasons with respect to your lot? Do mountains block the sun at any time during the year, especially in winter? I would look to separating the garage from the main house and connecting it to the house by an ell. This gives you more light into the house in winter. That done you might well be able to have a single story house. Get rid of all the extra gables. In a mountain home the fireplace - a large stone fireplace - should (usually) be the heart of the house. I would put the fireplace between the living and dining room. The bigger the better. You need a covered porch at the entry (maybe glassed in in extremely cold climates) to keep your guests from being crunched by sliding snow and ice.  Can you position the living room on the south side of the house with a stone floor to absorb heat from the sun? There are a thousand other details that only someone who designs mountain homes regularly would be able to advise you on.

May 18, 17 6:22 pm
billygoat

The rear is south facing and there is very little sunblock

Volunteer

In the spirit of a discussion on FLW's lake house in New York, this gives off (to me, anyway) a 'mountain house' vibe. Ideas for a place to start, anyway. It is his Berger house.

May 18, 17 6:31 pm
shellarchitect

The first design and all the ones after are far better than the shit my old firm was churning out for home builders

May 18, 17 7:17 pm
Yippee!

You said you wouldn't be allowed to build it in your neck of the woods - ?

shellarchitect

Yes, the local ordinance restricts the percent of the front facade that can be garage door. Google "snout house" and you will see a lot of critical articals as well as some discussion from planners about how to restrict them. Will also find people who love

Spoons

Are the windows over the garage in option 1 + 2 different heights so whether your taking a leak or taking a dump you still get a view?  

May 18, 17 8:28 pm

(OP deleted images)

May 19, 17 10:44 pm
b3tadine[sutures]

I don't think those are buildable renderings.

May 19, 17 11:46 pm
RickB-Astoria

True. I only had briefly glanced at them so I can't be sure but they seemed to look like either schematic or DD drawings or some draft towards the final CD set. They don't look like rendering drawings.

I just don't see them now to verify what I saw.

The only example I see are just a few elevations.

billygoat

Judging from the lack of constructive criticism, I guess no-one has any ideas on how to make this floor plan into a more attractive exterior.

Taking a closer look at it, if we move bedroom 4 to the other side and put the kitchen in front of the dining room, we'll end up with a narrower house. The main roofline would be reduced in height and we could do a side entrance garage with a narrower second story allowing for steeper roof pitch like we originally wanted. We can also do one pitch across the full rear of the house and not be over height. 

Thanks

 

May 20, 17 1:52 am
RickB-Astoria

Billy Goat, the art of architecture is like the culinary art. You are asking a room full of chefs... all with their own ideas. What would happen is, you would take different ideas from all these different people with different stylistic views and mesh them together in a way that makes things possibly worse then what you currently have. You won't have a continuity. Architecture is an art form consisting of an underlining pattern language in the overall design language and visual 'words'. Like poetry, you can just slap in lines or any literary art. Good architecture is eloquent architecture like eloquent literary work. If you just slap different ideas and words into the work without synthesizing it with the work as a whole. This is actually harder and is a time consuming part of architectural designing. You don't know what is in the detail of the Architect/Designer's plans you did show us for a short period of time and that of the elevations. You can't just slap the elevation of one drawing to the floor plans of another. You are looking at 2d drawings of a 3-dimensional structure. Everything has to be designed in relation to it's next greater context and to each other. Each of us will be able to synthesize our own individual take and approach of designing spaces, structure, and form and bring it into a structure with relationship to the purposes of each space and their effective relationship to each other. You shouldn't be going to an architect or designer just wanting plans for permits. Yes, we know that is part of your ultimate goal.

As others have said, we don't work for free. You don't either, right? You are just getting "5-cent Architecture" advice but not even giving us our nickels. Now, where's my nickel.  :-)

Sorry John Morefield. 

Non Sequitur

Hey billy, you cheap asshole, stop trying to solicit free professional advice. Maybe you would have a decent house design if you had hired a competent architect instead of a bottom feeding draftsman, but you did not.

billygoat

The architect that we're PAYING to produce the plans that you all flamed, has produced many million dollar homes and high end multi-family units. I imagine he's far more accomplished than the vast majority on these boards and yes we're PAYING him full rate. The design that he produced would work for many and is extremely functional with minimal square footage, it just doesn't produce the look that we're after. I thought I'd try and solicit some general ideas to be able to mull over so that we'd have a more precise direction to discuss with him when he returns. As i said, he's on holidays and we're on a time crunch so rather than sit at home doing nothing while he's gone, I thought I'd see what a bunch of architects would come up with. It would be extremely helpful to know what the broad possibilities are to be able to express to him more clearly what we're looking for and hopefully prevent starting all over. Kind of surprised that the post solicited hours of trolling (that I assume you're getting paid for because your time is so valuable) yet none of you thought to share your knowledge and mention that stretching the house out would reduce the width of the main truss height and a side entrance garage will get rid of the "snout house" look. As mentioned in the original post, our biggest battle is keeping it under the local height restriction. Great welcome to the forums guys!

RickB-Astoria

Is the person a licensed architect or is he a residential designer? The price of homes doesn't explicitly mean the design was from a licensed architect. Plenty of residential designers (non-licensed) has designed million dollar homes so chill out. I haven't flamed the architect or residential designer that you have paid to do the design work.

Word of advice, the look and feel should be worked out in schematic and design development BEFORE permit drawings. If you have examples of the look and feel from photos of houses that are examples of what you are looking for, send them to your architect/designer and explain what that the look & feel isn't quite on target and give feedback. It is the process of the back & forth dialogue between you and the designer/architect that makes the outcome of the design. You shouldn't ask the architect/designer to duplicate another architect/designer's design but you can expect something closer to the expected look & feel.

RickB-Astoria

"Snout house" refers to the characteristic of the garage being in the front projecting out being the wall and upper main roof line. Traditionally, before houses were having garages pushed to the front in the 1980s and later (ok, some earlier examples existed) making the garage the center-piece of the front elevation that's viewed, house designs with garages either had the garage detached and recessed towards the back or it was attached and still recessed. The garage was usually near the kitchen. Kitchens were usually near the side towards the backyard and on a lot where it is on the south side of a road, would also be towards the south elevation. Traditional 'rules of architectural design' of houses made the front entry into the home being the visual center-piece. Eventually, in the era of "McMansions", houses had started making the garage the center-piece but those BIG-ASS garage doors are often bland and unattractive. This big door element of the garage door almost always overshadow the main entry of the home especially if the garage door is projected out from the north elevation wall.

billygoat

Rick my post was directed at non sequitur. I appreciate your insight and the links you provided. It's a mountain home but only a 10,000 sq' barren flat lot so aside from the mountain town design, we're focused on function and can't do a sprawling bungalow that blends into the landscape. The build price is also ludicrous per sq foot so we're very limited in size.

RickB-Astoria

Ok, so perhaps "Mountic rustic" theme or style but ok. You can still achieve the goal without necessarily a sprawling floor plan. Some example of "Mountain homes" small:

RickB-Astoria

Here's one example that can fit on to a 10,000 sq.ft. site. 

More examples:

https://www.google.com/search?q=mountain+home+small&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwilqpmYiP_TAhUPyGMKHd3NDMUQsAQIKA&biw=1795&bih=817#imgrc=cUkK1MIXWTrhsM:

Here is an example of a "mountain home" with a more modern flair:

What do you see in common. You can still use the overall context of the region and natural materials and tones around. 

RickB-Astoria

Some more examples:

I can go all day with examples.

RickB-Astoria

What do you see in common with all these?

RickB-Astoria

The pictures are all copyright of their respective copyright holders. It's just being referenced to illustrate examples.

RickB-Astoria

BTW: What are the lot dimensions? If it is like 100' x 100' then you should be able to fit such a structure on the site with a garage either attached or detached.

randomised

"Judging from the lack of constructive criticism, I guess no-one has any ideas on how to make this floor plan into a more attractive exterior."

Can't polish a turd, at least not for free :-)

RickB-Astoria

At least not something anyone should endeavor to do for any amount.

citizen

Well, hell, y'all scared 'em off.  Now I'll never get to see those plans!

And, as someone who normally defends newbies posting on here, I gotta say that billy got off fairly easy.  This is (I'd wager a thousand bucks) a case of "I paid next to zero for these (at best) mediocre drawings and lazy design.  Please, newfound internet friends, now save me more money by critiquing these."

It wasn't 'til the specter of a lawsuit was mentioned that billy g. was moved to do anything... and take down the images.  The threat of having to find and then dust off his checkbook seems to have been a great motivator.

bill.  billy.  baby.  bubby.  I'm guessing you don't work for free.  Don't ask others to.

May 20, 17 2:51 am

Meanwhile a bunch of do-good 'necters are busy devaluing the entire profession by giving away their knowledge. Help somebody out, sure, personally. But not some cheap anonymous jackass doing an end run around a fellow architect. Imagine that's YOUR work posted by YOUR client. No wonder this profession is in the crapper.

billygoat

Not scared off, just not finding anything of value here. What the hell is an architect forum for, if it's not for discussing architectural problems and solutions? Our architect is being paid well and doing too well with too much demand. Seeing as you're spending hours trolling others designs, I assume you can't say the same.

citizen

My hunch is it's less about do-gooders than it is critics. As architects we love to kibitz and critique any design we come across (otherwise Archinect's forum would not exist). Like the person who straightens crooked pictures on the wall in other people's houses... less about helping the host than about satisfying the urge to fix an aesthetic problem. But eminently exploitable by cheap consumers, yes!

billygoat

Hahaha... now it's explotation! Google map street view was significantly more valuable than this forum was.

RickB-Astoria

You know that you're statement above can be interpreted as insulting even to those who are helping you without jabbing at the architect or designer you are paying to have the work done. The only critique that I have is that there was something missing in the communication dialogue between you and the architect/designer. Some how, what you are looking for in terms of results (design-wise) isn't quite communicated over. Before you move forward on construction documents, take a step back in schematic or design development (the conceptual design phase) to work out the design details and use visual examples to communicate to your architect/designer of what you are looking for and then move back forward through into construction document phase (CD). Somehow, the pre-CD phase work seemed to have been somewhat rushed without really getting at what is wanted. I think things got too far along and too close to construction document phase without really getting at what you the wanted. That is my only critique if anything. I'm not blaming you or the architect/designer. I blame both of you as jointly responsible for any inconvenience of back stepping before going forward because that's the best advice I can give you. Some suggest finding another architect/designer. I'm not suggesting that, yet. If the architect/designer is reading this, I suggest to work along a little bit. Billygoat, do understand that there is probably some additional cost to be billed but the architect/designer should be reasonable & fair to you as possible. If it appears that the architect/designer would be unworkable then seek out another architect/designer but there will be some inconvenience that will cause you but that may just be something you have to go with.

tintt

You said you aren't getting anything of value here? "I think the issue is that we started from the inside out and now are discovering that the out, is not at all what we were after." Your current designer is doing well? "Unfortunately to make an exterior that'll match the floor plan, we're stuck with a design that doesn't appeal to us."  Well he is making a killing off of you.

RickB-Astoria

tintt, yeah.... interesting and compelling point.

From what I see, a lot of this should have been resolved earlier on in concept phase. Floor plan and elevations and all 2-D drawings of a 3-D object (a house for example) all goes together.

Billygoat, you can't just take exterior elevation for one building and just slap it to the floor plan of another unless the exact same identical floor plans were used and that is almost never likely except from the same designer. Remember, there is fundamental construction and assemblage thinking (architectonics) that must be kept in mind. This is what design professionals are educated/trained in part of their study and practical experience.

billygoat

Good points Rick. I think our problem was trying to find out what the cost was before buying the lot, which resulted in figuring out the floor plan-

billygoat

Sq footage more than planning an overall house. While we sent lots of photos of homes we liked, we didn't send any of those we didn't like. I don't think it'll take a lot of manipulating to switch the design into something that's functional and attractive inside and out. The biggest fault with the original plan was having the upstairs floor plan set to the same width as the lower causing the roof line to have to start high up on the wall and with a low pitch roof. Stretching the house out perpendicular to the main truss allows the truss to be narrower and steeper. Adding shed roofs where the upper rooms extend out to the wall keeps the importan front and rear elevations attractive with a single pitch and the side elevation broken up with different bump outs along the roof line. At the risk of getting severely flamed by the unconstructive members, I'll post a VERY ROUGH amendment and see if I'm going down the right path.

RickB-Astoria

As Donna said, don't take the statements too personal by some of the more crodgity old farts that are not so constructive but sometimes they have good points embedded.

RickB-Astoria

For another nickel,

http://miltonstricker.com/

http://miltonstricker.com/Book/index.html

While this is not explicit in relation to this project, this is a good resource but it is not a complete resource for architectural designing.

May 20, 17 5:56 am

Anyone paying a nickel for your advice would be grossly overcharged.

RickB-Astoria

Miles, anyone paying you any amount would be grossly overcharged. The above was just a resource for the OP to learn a little bit and maybe... just maybe become a iota better at understanding the art of architecture. One thing about "mountain home" or any other 'rustic' home style is about blending into nature and the context of nature being strong in the design of the home. In part, the materials used on the exterior, interior and even structural would be natural materials such as wood, stone masonry, etc. Now, Miles, you owe me a nickel. (jk)

Volunteer

Is this to be a full-time residence or a vacation home? What are the dimensions of the (.22 acre) lot? Have you considered building a two- bedroom home without a garage but designed so that additional rooms and features can be added at a later date? Do you want traditional mountain or mountain modern? What you have submitted for far does not look anything like a 'mountain house' even the cliché kind.

May 20, 17 2:33 pm
RickB-Astoria

From the above elevations, I would lend to agree.

billygoat

It's a pie shaped lot narrow at the front and wide at the back. We want to do around 1,000 sq' per floor to keep the footprint smaller and the yard bigger. We thought about doing add ons but we are sick of renos and will have a revenue suite in the basement so would rather just get it done. We like a mix of traditional and modern. We don't like the flat single pitch roofs without the peak but we like the more modern peaked roofs with multiple angles. I'll upload some examples. Needless to say the elevations missed the mark and I agree that if you took away the rock and rafter treatment, it wouldn't have a mountain feel at all with low angled roof lines and tall straight walls. This is the problem with the design.

Billy goat: You made a simple mistake that anyone could have made: you mistook Archinect Forum as a place for non-architects to solicit advice. This place is not that. This place is where architects hang out with each other to talk shop and complain with sympathetic peers. Think of a 1940's bar filled with newspapermen after the daily deadline has been met, drinking hard and ranting about the profession they love even though it exhausts them constantly. That's what this place is, for us.

As citizen said, you've actually gotten out relatively unscathed compared to the unfortunate others who have previously wandered in here looking for free advice.

I suggest you go to Houzz. It's a good website focused on residential design; I use it frequently with my clients, and it is far more open to question-asking by clients.

Good luck with your house and don't take the criticism here too personally. You just wandered into the wrong bar.

May 20, 17 4:37 pm
RickB-Astoria

Yes, Donna is generally right. We do and should be a little better in our accommodation and treatment by those not in the architectural profession. I speak broadly to both licensed and non-licensed architectural professionals. There are folks here that are outright cranky & crodgity. Donna's expression kind of hits the mark about this forum.

Billygoat, I am approaching the point where I can't really be assisting you much more in the designing of your house without setting up a written contact to be signed and then subsequently getting paid. Any more specific design recommendation to your home is outright billable work. Remember, we get paid for this kind of work. Even John Morefield was brilliant to getting paid at least 5 cents just for this kind of advice giving.

billygoat

Hahaha... understood. I guess I should have posed as a beginner architect soliciting advice from my peers and ranting about how difficult my clients are.
;)

billygoat

Out of curiosity, what are your thoughts with having a second set of eyes look at a plan? Is there someone in the forum that is very respected in this style of home design (I'll try and ad some examples below). What's the going rate for looking at the existing plans and offering a rough concept that would take us down a more attractive path. We need to stick local for the full plans because the bylaws are ludicrous but a little more money spent now would save us in the long run and two heads are often better than one.

RickB-Astoria

I'm sure there are some here on this forum that could assist you through that process but I wouldn't be surprised if they want a little money for the time. Little word of advice, never pose as a licensed architect and not being one. That will raise all kinds of hell. However, this forum is frequented by those working on their path to architectural licensing. Keep in mind, a lot of these folks when going through architecture school and having their classwork critiqued has gone through notoriously brutal critique sessions by asshole visiting critics. I'm not sure what you mean by the words "bylaws".

Edit: I think I have an idea.... culmination of local regulations, codes, etc.

billygoat

We're happy to pay for results but don't have unlimited funds. Yes local regulations, codes, architectural controls, bylaws etc.

RickB-Astoria

I don't know of any place in the U.S. where there is any requirement that a person (architect/designer) designing the building or project has to be local to the city or county or state. I understand the local zoning codes, city or county laws, building codes but it seems to be something else. With that in mind, is this property part of some kind of homeowner association (HOA) and the requirements are specific of a HOA requirement?

billygoat

They don't have to be local but if they're not, then they will spend an immense amount of time learning all of the stringent build requirements for the town.

RickB-Astoria

Maybe not. We tend to work in many jurisdictions and learn to understand these varied requirements fairly quickly.

When I work with clients in multiple jurisdictions, I still take the time to verify if the project meets those applicable requirements so I have to research them anyway. It really doesn't cost my client more or less whether I am local to the town or not. I don't bill them more just because it may take myself a little more nor do I necessarily bill them less if it happen to take a little less time then my internal preliminary estimates go. 

RickB-Astoria

For me, it's more as a sole-proprietor, I generally establish a relatively fixed fee or somewhat flexible fee with a GMP (guaranteed maximum price) based on specific defined scope or a base design fee (up to a guaranteed maximum price based on scope) plus certain hard costs like the cost of the prints & other reimbursable expenses. If there are certain additional services or change orders beyond the initial scope agreed upon, those are additional. I take a certain amount for myself to live and operate on for my personal life, certain portion to cover operational expenses and the rest are effectively retained earnings of the business which may still be used for down the road expenses of operation. If I was working for an architectural firm, a firm may charge a specific amount for its services, I may still be working at a set salary amount and it basically would cost the firm the same amount whether I work 40 hours a week or 60 or even 80 hours a week. I would be paid a salary and would be exempt from overtime. The bottom line for the firm is effectively the same. As a sole-proprietorship, if a job took a little longer than I expected, I am ending up working for effectively a lower hourly rate while if I get the work done a little faster than expected, I would be effectively working for a little higher hourly rate. So I gain or lose a little on that trade-off basis. There are many architects that do the same thing. As I see it, the client isn't really involved on the exact by the hour basis. We're basically independent contractors so we just manage whatever resources to get what we agreed to do for a set price agreed on and if it took more work hours than estimated, we don't charge more just because we underestimated the hours.

Non Sequitur

Donna, don't go ruining our fun.

May 20, 17 5:32 pm
billygoat

Here's a look at the style we were after. Is anyone here who's very experienced in this design and confident that they could provide a functional and attractive plan and interested in discussing a realistic consulting fee? We would be looking at very rough ideas only to use with our current architect. There are way to many controls in this area to hire a non-local for the full plans. 

May 20, 17 10:20 pm
Non Sequitur

Billy, that's your current "architect's" job. If they can't deliver, hire someone else.

Btw those images are in a different league than those terrible elevations you posted earlier.

May 21, 17 2:40 am
Volunteer

The second photo shows a clever way of presenting a two-bay garage to the street. The overall design is very similar to the work of Locati Architects of Bozeman Montana.

There is a quarterly magazine called Big Sky Journal that has one issue a year (especially) about mountain architecture. A lot of the architectural firms in Montana advertise there. Mountain Living is a monthly magazine that has one annual issue devoted to architecture with a pretty complete listing of all the mountain architects in the West. 

May 21, 17 6:49 am

Well done, Volunteer. That's super helpful.

billygoat

Thanks for this, I'll take a look

May 21, 17 9:04 am

Just hire Rick, he'll take care of you.

senjohnblutarsky

Damn it. All the fun happens on the weekend when I don't check the forum. 

May 22, 17 8:04 am
kjdt

My significant other is a medical professional.  On the website where she chats with others in her specialty, they refuse to engage in discussion with lay people looking for advice, as a matter of professional ethics.  When somebody asks questions about their condition, or seeks a "second opinion" or "another set of ears" on that forum, somebody politely explains that it is not a forum for seeking advice, and that they should seek medical advice or a second opinion from an appropriate professional - and then the rest of the forum participants ignore the thread.  That would be the best course of action here.

Original poster:  you can email the site admin and have the thread removed.  I can still see the sketches that you posted initially, and that is a potential problem for you and your architect.  Also be advised that some of those providing advice in this thread are not licensed architects and do not have the experience that they imply.  You would be much better off seeking a second opinion or new architect offline locally.

May 22, 17 10:28 am

Professional ethics in architecture? 

RickB-Astoria

My advice to billygoat was mainly to take examples of projects (homes in this case) that exhibits the characteristics that he/she is looking for in the project to effectively communicate what he or she is looking for and the short-comings of this design. I have not responded to taking up being a consultant in addition to that of the architect or designer that is already commissioned. In fact I'm kind of hesitant on doing that.

kjdt

It doesn't matter what your advice was about. Members of this forum shouldn't be giving advice on the forum to other people's clients. It's unprofessional. If the OP needs a 2nd opinion on the design or advice on how to refine the design, options are to pay another professional for that service, ask friends for their opinions, and possibly go hang out on a forum that has an amateurs-helping-amateurs culture, like Houzz.  The first would be preferable. 

RickB-Astoria

I understand where you are getting at. I try not to be a stand-offish jackass. People like billygoat are going to go to any forum where it is clear that there are architects (in the universal sense of the word vs. the narrower statutory definition) they come across for architectural advice if they are seeking it. There are things that are really not billable as you aren't going to get paid for suggesting them to talk to their architect. Your example with your significant other that is in the medical profession has a very life or death reason for not giving medical advice of any kind over the internet to a stranger. Even suggesting them to go back and talk to their architect is frankly by definition giving an advice. Being a stand-offish asshole is also unprofessional. Don't you think there was a bit of that going on by some on the forum?

kjdt

No I don't believe so. I believe your participation in this thread has been unprofessional and unethical.

RickB-Astoria

Really? Sue me. I rather be kind and friendly to anyone seeking some advice or direction. I bet you think Non Sequitur's comments earlier in this thread is very professional and ethical. When is it ever professional and ethical to directly call a person an asshole.

While, I may use the word from time to time in this thread, I am not directing calling a particular person an asshole or "cheap asshole" at that. It maybe argued that using vulgarity of any kind of unprofessional. Okay. Fair argument. However, directly calling a person an asshole is unprofessional by just about any academic text book definition.

It seems to me that you are trying to impose your significant other's medical occupation's ethics and conduct on me. The last I recalled, I am not a doctor, nurse, medical assistant or other health care professional. I'm a building designer.... or architect by definition in some places in this world but I'm not a health care / medical professional. I'm in a different profession. Why are you imposing another occupation's ethics on me?

JLC-1

man, is the internet a dangerous shit show or what?

May 22, 17 11:01 am
Volunteer

I believe this site already has a monitor. And it doesn't need another. Please stop parading your opinion around as defacto gospel.

The OP was an individual who was understandably unhappy with the performance of his 'architect', although we don't know if the individual was licensed or not. We don't know who the OP is, who the 'architect' is, where the house was to be built. The OP was told that he was correct in being underwhelmed by the results to date and that he should seek out 'mountain modern designs' that he likes and approach the architects and/or designers of those homes to see if the elements he admires could be incorporated into his own home.

The fact that your spouse may hide poor-performing MDs who are doing more harm than good in your little community is no reason we should follow suit here. Try and get over yourself.

May 22, 17 5:30 pm
RickB-Astoria

Thank you. Amen to that. I may have been a little over verbose but that was my point with billygoat.

Understandably unhappy? "We concentrated on our floor plans over our outside design" but then wanted some 'mountain house'. I think we can all picture this client. OP should have spent more time looking for a good architect and less getting in their way.

billygoat

Wow, didn't mean to cause a
lynching. I'm pretty sure I haven't been given any advise on here that has lessened the amount I'll be paying an architect. On the other hand, I've been to aviation forums and received flight tips. Didn't less the amount I paid in flight training. Some times it's hard to put down on paper what you want or to understand what the options are. If you drew up a design that you thought your

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

  • ×Search in:


Please wait... loading
Please wait... loading