We shouldn't be building to a national type when the climate across the country varies greatly.
Climate varies, but the American lifestyle is becoming more universal every day. And let's face it, climate doesn't mean as much anymore when nobody ever opens their windows.
Relating this to the other thread, I think people in certain areas assume the American lifestyle is becoming more universal. These people see their area, and the others populating it, and assume this applies to all. That is just not the case. Granted, we may share some habits, and access to TV, internet, and radio have slowly degraded our dialects, interactions with society and the like. But, there is still a great difference in lifestyles. People in rural areas are not living the same way as people in suburbs.
I commute an hour to work. People in suburbs may do that, too. But I am covering over 100 miles each day. I doubt that is the case in the suburbs. That's just one small example. There is almost no public transport in rural areas. So, designing around or near public transport is not an issue.
The list can go on, but the big thing, for me, is this: These mcmansion/developer type houses pay no attention to where they are. They're a box, plopped down in any location without regard for what is outside, or inside. They almost always have zero overhang. I've seen houses with just one window on an entire side of the house. There is no consideration for the environment in which the house is placed. As a result, consider the interior environment. Shades and curtains are put up to keep the direct sunlight out because no over hang was provided. Or, we just don't have a window, period. So, we have shut out the outside world. We're now living in a vacuum.
So, we're holed up inside, which brings us back to living in our world through the internet, tv, radio, etc. Just another way we're suppressing local cultures.
US culture: independence and individuality expressed through the consumption of mass media and corporate products. The more you consume, the more cultured you are.
My point was not that there aren't differing lifestyles. I just mean that the differences don't have much to do with climate. The suburbanite in Atlanta lives almost identically with the suburbanite in Salt Lake City. Same with the inner city, exurbs, etc.
The lack of windows, etc. you cite confirms my point. The typical person comes home from work, throws together some kind of dinner, and then plops down in front of the TV. They don't know or much care what is going on outside. This trend probably started with electricity, got going good with radio and television, and has culminated with central air conditioning. The Jane Jacobs ideal of sitting on the front porch and interacting with the neighbors and passers-by just isn't what people do. Like it or not.
This idea that global is the new 'vernacular' is just changing the definition of the word vernacular. Call it something else, but buying asphalt shingles at Home Depot is not vernacular when you can literally buy the same product everywhere after the product produced halfway around the earth. It's 'American Global Convenience Style^TM', but not vernacular.
Buying a house as financial investment was a totally foreign concept to someone in the 1800s, the current home ownership process is not vernacular. I'm not saying the vernacular can't slowly change over time, but certainly once the economic system of home ownership spans entire regions, countries, continents, we are talking about a completely different process of producing and inhabiting houses. When you can't open your window because your house is built in a way that it is counterproductive, it's not vernacular.
We get what we deserve folks. I think that's true of the built environment, in entertainment, in politics, in our daily interactions with people, everywhere. At least 2015 will be over in a few hours. On to 2016!
Man, this post takes me back. During my last internship I did structural design for dozens of these kinds of projects. You'd be surprised how many different architects pump out the same redundant "luxury" (which, to the clients, really means a lot of sqft) ranch homes in different layouts.
I think many aspects of the vernacular are still in place. The climate in a certain region hasn't changed, the local materials available in a given region hasn't changed, and the history and specifications of the buildings built in earlier times in each region are readily available. The ranch house is dead, every last bit of life has been rung out of it, and the McMansions are not very satisfactory to anyone. Part of the problem is that architects want to reinvent the wheel for every house and are above going back and seeing how generations of architects in a given region have solved the same problems they are addressing.
Donna, I think the ranch house has just been overdone, plus it has been exported to different parts of the country without a thought as to the climate, local materials available, and existing homes in the different regions. Imagine a family being excited about a move to a New England coastal town full of Federal and Greek Classic homes only to find the only thing they can afford is a ranch house some developer plopped down on a farm he bought on the outskirts of town.
Ah, I see, thanks. You mean the ranch as a generic tract home is dead, not that a well-designed climatically-appropriate open-plan house is dead as a concept.
gaak. what an ugly house. to the OP - the slopes could be exactly the same and still be an ugly, stupid house. I guarantee that the problem wasn't the architect, or draftsman, it was the OP - or his wife - and their instance on something stupid, and the draftsman threw up his hands and just drew it. Why is the entry a bit taller? because the OP insisted on the window above it, and wanted it "more grand". they didn't want a second story, because they are worried about climbing stairs. No dormers, they cost money. Just give me more bedrooms and a bigger square footage man. But make it cheap. Im on a budget. I'm not rich, you know.
OP didn't pay the designer, or dinged him down to some silly price, then was surprised when he didn't get a beautiful mansion. OP will spend more on carpet for this Piece Of Shit than he will on the designer, but thinks he's smart.
to the OP - just tear down whatever piece of the shit that offends you, then build what you think will look better. Eagerly awaiting the result.
*I seriously hope the OP isn't just a troll, because this is great trolling, either way I love it**
Ok I'm back from my vacation to the far internetless north and now I can see the pictures the OP posted. I think we've covered everything here pretty well, but I'll add two things:
1. that house is bbad, and waaaaaaaay too big no matter what gets done to it. 2. I can't see the imagined drainage problem with the original roof form but the "proposed solution" definitely adds huge moisture penetration issues as compared to the original
I posted this thread to Twitter and someone mentioned that the OP might have thought Archinect is like Houzz, where people will pose questions and supposedly get advice from professionals hoping to turn their free advice into paying clients.
To the OP, this isn't Houzz; Archinect is the dive bar where architects gather after work to bitch and complain and connect with our fellows. I'm sure whatever profession you're in you know a LOT more about than we do; if one of us was to wander into your profession's bar and ask a stupid question we should expect the exact same ridicule. No hard feelings.
Last time I gave a serious answer to someone on Houzz, another member of the public threw a hissy fit because I gave an educated opinion on design that conflicted with his opinion. I don't comment on houzz anymore, it's a place where home owners go to an echo chamber to congratulate each other on bad design choices.
Donna: How do you know the OP's house is too big? I didn't see anything in the way of floor plans. Maybe I missed something.
The basic style of anonitect's picture is OK but it's a crappy house. Split levels suck, carports suck even more, and windows opening into the carport don't send me.
I do like the cars, particularly the '61 Buick "bubble top" coupe. The postwar prosperity and optimism of the '50s and early '60s was wonderful. Sigh.
I'd probably paint it a different color or maybe even re-clad it with natural cedar, but I love the house in anonitect's pic. I love the wooded site even more. Carports make sense in the Pacific Northwest (where I'm guessing this house is located). The mild climate doesn't require a fully-enclosed garage, but you still don't want tree sap dripping all over your car.
OK. If you are just looking at the front elevation, it is spread out but I've seen (and done) houses that are a whole lot bigger than that. I think it's unrealistic to expect many clients to be aecetics. Who really wants to live on Walden Pond. Even Thoreau decided to bag it after a while.
90% unearned arrogance here. Most of you display a discredit to your trade... Then again, what should be expected from a group of people that live to impose their imagination on reality.
Also... live to impose their imagination on reality? What is that supposed to mean... Is it a compliment, it sounds like a compliment. I'm sure it's not a compliment though because it's nonsense. How does anyone impose their imagination on reality in architecture? Have you seen a building lately, no one is just summoning them out of thin air.
I got an email notification of a "thumbs down" really bummed me out. Went back to see the offending comment and still stand by it. Still don't understand the serious drainage problems and the suggested cures seems much worse than the imagined disease.
I'm very curious, was 6 years enough time to resolve the issues?
Need Help with Mixed Roof Pitches on Front of House
Vernacular only exists in a historical sense, from an era that is rapidly receding in time.
We shouldn't be building to a national type when the climate across the country varies greatly.
Climate varies, but the American lifestyle is becoming more universal every day. And let's face it, climate doesn't mean as much anymore when nobody ever opens their windows.
Relating this to the other thread, I think people in certain areas assume the American lifestyle is becoming more universal. These people see their area, and the others populating it, and assume this applies to all. That is just not the case. Granted, we may share some habits, and access to TV, internet, and radio have slowly degraded our dialects, interactions with society and the like. But, there is still a great difference in lifestyles. People in rural areas are not living the same way as people in suburbs.
I commute an hour to work. People in suburbs may do that, too. But I am covering over 100 miles each day. I doubt that is the case in the suburbs. That's just one small example. There is almost no public transport in rural areas. So, designing around or near public transport is not an issue.
The list can go on, but the big thing, for me, is this: These mcmansion/developer type houses pay no attention to where they are. They're a box, plopped down in any location without regard for what is outside, or inside. They almost always have zero overhang. I've seen houses with just one window on an entire side of the house. There is no consideration for the environment in which the house is placed. As a result, consider the interior environment. Shades and curtains are put up to keep the direct sunlight out because no over hang was provided. Or, we just don't have a window, period. So, we have shut out the outside world. We're now living in a vacuum.
So, we're holed up inside, which brings us back to living in our world through the internet, tv, radio, etc. Just another way we're suppressing local cultures.
US culture: independence and individuality expressed through the consumption of mass media and corporate products. The more you consume, the more cultured you are.
My point was not that there aren't differing lifestyles. I just mean that the differences don't have much to do with climate. The suburbanite in Atlanta lives almost identically with the suburbanite in Salt Lake City. Same with the inner city, exurbs, etc.
The lack of windows, etc. you cite confirms my point. The typical person comes home from work, throws together some kind of dinner, and then plops down in front of the TV. They don't know or much care what is going on outside. This trend probably started with electricity, got going good with radio and television, and has culminated with central air conditioning. The Jane Jacobs ideal of sitting on the front porch and interacting with the neighbors and passers-by just isn't what people do. Like it or not.
This idea that global is the new 'vernacular' is just changing the definition of the word vernacular. Call it something else, but buying asphalt shingles at Home Depot is not vernacular when you can literally buy the same product everywhere after the product produced halfway around the earth. It's 'American Global Convenience Style^TM', but not vernacular.
Buying a house as financial investment was a totally foreign concept to someone in the 1800s, the current home ownership process is not vernacular. I'm not saying the vernacular can't slowly change over time, but certainly once the economic system of home ownership spans entire regions, countries, continents, we are talking about a completely different process of producing and inhabiting houses. When you can't open your window because your house is built in a way that it is counterproductive, it's not vernacular.
We get what we deserve folks. I think that's true of the built environment, in entertainment, in politics, in our daily interactions with people, everywhere. At least 2015 will be over in a few hours. On to 2016!
Man, this post takes me back. During my last internship I did structural design for dozens of these kinds of projects. You'd be surprised how many different architects pump out the same redundant "luxury" (which, to the clients, really means a lot of sqft) ranch homes in different layouts.
I think many aspects of the vernacular are still in place. The climate in a certain region hasn't changed, the local materials available in a given region hasn't changed, and the history and specifications of the buildings built in earlier times in each region are readily available. The ranch house is dead, every last bit of life has been rung out of it, and the McMansions are not very satisfactory to anyone. Part of the problem is that architects want to reinvent the wheel for every house and are above going back and seeing how generations of architects in a given region have solved the same problems they are addressing.
Donna, I think the ranch house has just been overdone, plus it has been exported to different parts of the country without a thought as to the climate, local materials available, and existing homes in the different regions. Imagine a family being excited about a move to a New England coastal town full of Federal and Greek Classic homes only to find the only thing they can afford is a ranch house some developer plopped down on a farm he bought on the outskirts of town.
Ranch house to me means a single story plan, with or without basement. It's not synonymous with tract or production housing. Two different things.
Don't forget the split level, geezer.
I kinda like this house, even though I know that it's the velveeta of architecture.
gaak. what an ugly house. to the OP - the slopes could be exactly the same and still be an ugly, stupid house. I guarantee that the problem wasn't the architect, or draftsman, it was the OP - or his wife - and their instance on something stupid, and the draftsman threw up his hands and just drew it. Why is the entry a bit taller? because the OP insisted on the window above it, and wanted it "more grand". they didn't want a second story, because they are worried about climbing stairs. No dormers, they cost money. Just give me more bedrooms and a bigger square footage man. But make it cheap. Im on a budget. I'm not rich, you know.
OP didn't pay the designer, or dinged him down to some silly price, then was surprised when he didn't get a beautiful mansion. OP will spend more on carpet for this Piece Of Shit than he will on the designer, but thinks he's smart.
to the OP - just tear down whatever piece of the shit that offends you, then build what you think will look better. Eagerly awaiting the result.
*I seriously hope the OP isn't just a troll, because this is great trolling, either way I love it**
anonitect, I love that house.
Ok I'm back from my vacation to the far internetless north and now I can see the pictures the OP posted. I think we've covered everything here pretty well, but I'll add two things:
1. that house is bbad, and waaaaaaaay too big no matter what gets done to it.
2. I can't see the imagined drainage problem with the original roof form but the "proposed solution" definitely adds huge moisture penetration issues as compared to the original
I posted this thread to Twitter and someone mentioned that the OP might have thought Archinect is like Houzz, where people will pose questions and supposedly get advice from professionals hoping to turn their free advice into paying clients.
To the OP, this isn't Houzz; Archinect is the dive bar where architects gather after work to bitch and complain and connect with our fellows. I'm sure whatever profession you're in you know a LOT more about than we do; if one of us was to wander into your profession's bar and ask a stupid question we should expect the exact same ridicule. No hard feelings.
There's no water problem with this design.
Donna: How do you know the OP's house is too big? I didn't see anything in the way of floor plans. Maybe I missed something.
The basic style of anonitect's picture is OK but it's a crappy house. Split levels suck, carports suck even more, and windows opening into the carport don't send me.
I do like the cars, particularly the '61 Buick "bubble top" coupe. The postwar prosperity and optimism of the '50s and early '60s was wonderful. Sigh.
I'd probably paint it a different color or maybe even re-clad it with natural cedar, but I love the house in anonitect's pic. I love the wooded site even more. Carports make sense in the Pacific Northwest (where I'm guessing this house is located). The mild climate doesn't require a fully-enclosed garage, but you still don't want tree sap dripping all over your car.
geezer, it doesn't even fit on the page, that's how I know it's too big ;-)
Donna, nice metaphor of Archinect as a dive bar.
OK. If you are just looking at the front elevation, it is spread out but I've seen (and done) houses that are a whole lot bigger than that. I think it's unrealistic to expect many clients to be aecetics. Who really wants to live on Walden Pond. Even Thoreau decided to bag it after a while.
I really like dive bars.
God, I loved reading this thread! Thanks for the snarky dive bar atmosphere without all the smoke. :)
How did I miss originally, that the OP's handle was Aesthete! I mean that house...
90% unearned arrogance here. Most of you display a discredit to your trade... Then again, what should be expected from a group of people that live to impose their imagination on reality.
“90% unearned”? That’s incredibly specific for someone that just wandered in ...
I like that this person came and brought a 5 year old thread back to life just to complain that other people are demonstrating an unearned arrogance.
Where is a mirror when you need one...
Also... live to impose their imagination on reality? What is that supposed to mean... Is it a compliment, it sounds like a compliment. I'm sure it's not a compliment though because it's nonsense. How does anyone impose their imagination on reality in architecture? Have you seen a building lately, no one is just summoning them out of thin air.
I've been trying to find a good tagline for my design biz. "We impose our imagination on your reality" has a ring to it.
(People hire us specifically because they want our imagination to improve their reality.)
... random necro from a one-post pony + self-thumbs up. Classic.
OMG self-thumbs up that's awesome. Reminds me of Stephen Kings' story about auto-cannibalism Survivor Type.
I think we've finally had our first meeting with Justin Shitbow, welcome. I'm pretty sure that 100% of my arrogance, is earned. I should know.
I got an email notification of a "thumbs down" really bummed me out. Went back to see the offending comment and still stand by it. Still don't understand the serious drainage problems and the suggested cures seems much worse than the imagined disease.
I'm very curious, was 6 years enough time to resolve the issues?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.