this is a wild ass guess, but it looks like something stanley saitowitz might try.

not saitowitz i've just checked, but thanks anyway!

this is a long shot, too, but it looks like the way roto builds models but not like a roto project. is it, by chance, clark stevens, the partner at roto who has a much simpler and more essential design approach in his own work?

googled clark stevens i'm afraid its not him either, all his work should be listed on their site yeah? but thanks keep them guesses coming. :)

i got nothin'.

anderson anderson was my next guess, but i checked their site. they've messed with both cantilevers and prefab, but this doesn't seem to be one of theirs.

haha no worries thanks for the effort

The architect is BUILDING STUDIO based in Memphis:

http://www.buildingstudio.net/

The house is called Expanded Field House in Alaska..

You'll find all you need on their website

ah, excellent! coleman coker. wouldn't have guessed that one.

that's awesome thanks a lot. i didn't expect this to be so easy!!

so i sent the main architect (?) coleman coker an e-mail requesting any detailed drawings of the structural system used they could give out and he responded right way with two detailed sections, just what i needed. nice people. this is definitely my day!

p.s. cheap move but i'm going to promote my other newer entry/request, now go to "drawbridges" haha.
:)

structurally it reminds me the system flw used in falling water at bear run.

Harry Weese beat them to it a long time ago, and his was complete with a floor oculus to view the shoreline a couple hundered feet below.
Now that I think of it, this may just qualify as an absolute rip-off... Anyone know the Weese house I'm talking about? I believe it's on a bluff in Michigan...

hbiz is cuter than harry weese ever was!!!

haha thanks vado. Rim it took me a while but i found it! Shadowcliff House in Green Bay, Wisconsin, yeah?





i only managed to come up with these with no attached information about the project, yeah it could be a rip-off (u didn't mean me with that right?)! do u know any references i can dig up for this one? couldn't find anything else, or maybe my googling skills are just lousy.

the weese one is cool, but there is a major difference of which hibz should take note. looks like the weese design is a glass box 'hung' from a steel beam that cantilevers out from the slope.

the buildingstudio one is itself a vierendeel truss, the space of the house occupying the web area of the truss. architects seem to be doing a lot of this lately, koolhaas talks about it in smlxl as something he learned from balmond, etc.

so while it looks similar there is an difference of essential strategy in hung glass box and house as structural element.

both cool finds.

There is a similar looking project in Balmond's book Informal, it's Koolhaas's Bordeaux Villa. The structural detail is (novel and) fairly well explained

it's a nice building ... bloody deep cantilever too !! flw would have been proud .

never heard of these guys (building studio) before ... they've got some pretty good work !!

PsyArch i'm familiar with his villa good thing u brought it to mind. i'll definitely check the book for the detail, don't know why but lately i've been fascinated/obsessed by the detailing in everything haha. i guess it's a good thing, good timing with my (graduation) project! Steven thanks yeah i took note of that and relative to my scheme both approaches are doable, but i'm leaning more towards the alaska one, i think a steel open web complements the design more, since i'm dealing with completely separate units and not one whole suspended mass.
sporadic i agree their projects are cool! i like that there's no repetitiveness so u can't really get too familiar with their work.

I don't know if I would want to ride out an Alaskan Earthquake in this house one. It might just fall off the side of the mountain when things
start rocking and rolling. Nice concept. There is an architect named Jim Fox from around Highlands, North Carolina that has some very cool projects perched at the edge of the mountain.

sporadic-
you won't know the name buildingstudio, and i'm not sure why they went so anonymous when they chose that name, but you might remember coleman coker and samuel mockbee (originator of rural studio) had an office called mockbee/coker.

Well your Google skills are better than mine Hbiz -- thanks for finding it -- I couldn't find ANY photos. I hadn't seen that house for quite a while...

Actually, on the Weese project, it's hard to tell exactly how the structure works... the beams themselves don't appear large enough to support the enclosure load.

I think Steven is partially correct in that a difference is evident, although I wouldn't go nearly as far as he does in attempting to establish a fundamental distinction between the two. I don't agree that the Building Studio approach represents a difference in "essential" strategy, but, rather, a secondary difference in diagram. I'd disagree that the Building Studio house is really, as you say, "house as structural element". I think it's more of a question of where the occupy-able space was chosen to occur. The three obvious choices are simply hung below the structure (Weese), sitting within the structure (Building Stuido), or, not exampled here, sitting on top of the structure.

If I were a Building Studio associate, and I were presenting this house design to the client, and then some troublemaking Archinecter showed up with some Shadowcliff photos, I bet I'd start some serious squirming. As well I should.

so what if they are similar?

the general idea is "we want this house to fly out over the cliff"

is that really something that since done once, should never be done again?

if i worked with coker, i wouldn't be ashamed to show clients pictures of Shadowcliff...i'd probably use them to bolster my own ideas...i'd also make it a point to show why their project will be better.