The Cody Cabin, as I’m calling it, has been through several iterations to date, but I think we’re getting very close to locking in the floor plan. Thanks to everyone who commented either via the blog or through email on the first posting for this project. It’s great to get feedback from other architects and designers on your work. Without critique we can’t really grow or learn to look at things from a fresh perspective and that is important for the success of any profession. So, again, thank you.
This latest version takes into account some design changes more heavily based on the premise that this will be a vacation rental. Therefore storage and more generous closets are not as important or necessary. Currently the plan sits as a 2 bedroom, 2 bath home, but the second bedroom is designed to ultimately be divided into two separate sleeping spaces for a total of 3 full bedrooms.
As you can see the organization of the plan hasn’t changed overly much. The main differences are, of course, the reduced size of storage and the enlargement of the guest bedroom. The living space was made a little more generous, but is still kept compact. The idea is that the main living and dining space is more of a staging area to the real “living” space which is outside taking advantage of the spectacular views on site.
The structure, at this point, is a combination of concrete masonry and wood framing, which can be seen in the renderings below. As a way to play with texture and material on both interior and exterior faces, it was decided to mix up the material a little bit. So, essentially what I’ve done is create a stem wall around the perimeter out of concrete masonry and varied the heights to create a great deal of visual interest and finishing the walls off with 2×6 wood framing and horizontal siding. An upcoming change will most likely be to update the structure from cmu and wood framing to an all ICF (Insulated Concrete Forms) wall structure. This will save some money in erection/construction time but it will also allow for a continuous and unbroken insulation and moisture barrier around the entire home.
Topping off the structure is a simple shed roof over the main living areas and a separate, lower shed roof over the garage. The roof itself will utilize engineered single span rafters (LVL most likely) with a insulated sheathing panel in order to leave the rafters exposed on the interior and a standing seam metal roof.
Again, and as always, I welcome any and all critique. What do you think?
That kitchen/dining/living layout is exactly how I would’ve done it! Love the open circulation in the kitchen & the integration with the other living areas. Like!
Thanks Becky! When someone who specializes in kitchens praises your work you know you’ve done something right! 🙂 Very much appreciated! Thank you! 😀
I do like the simple layout and design myself. I am still troubled over the length of the K/D/L it seems cramped (left to right on dwg). But the open layout is great. The other thing I would change is the door to the guest bathroom. You see that as soon as you enter. The master bath is a nice layout with fixtures away from exterior walls for inclusion of windows. The guest room is smart too with the flexibility in becoming two spaces.
As for the exterior, I am also unsure about the exterior composition. What is the concept there? Do you see these forms wrapping and becoming 3D planes that become the spaces? The three roofs seem to collide based on the imagery. Also, is there any chance for clerestory windows to take advantage of the roof shape? Is there a specific client driving these choices or is this speculative. Its a good design, so I hope I am helping. I appreciate your willingness to accept comments regardless of your opinion of them. It’s a healthy process for all of us.
Lee, great comments as always. And I agree with you. If we all were willing to put our work out for open critique from our peers, imagine how much BETTER our architecture would be and consequently how much BETTER would our architects be? But I digress.
The K/D/L is perhaps a little cramped left to right, BUT that is intentional. For two reasons. The first being that the clients (most decisions are client driven, but still collaborative on my part) are not as concerned with “living” space. The function and flow of the house is focused more on the outdoor activities available in the area with Yellowstone and other parks literally within sight. Also, the clients, and myself, are trying to design a space that is as efficient as possible. That being said, there is enough “travel” room around all furnishings and fixtures, at a minimum, nothing more. The kitchen is even more grand then they wanted, but I managed to get it in there.
The guest bath being in view of the entry. Yeah I don’t necessarily like that either, but it was a decision that I made based on the flow of the house. I didn’t want guests or vacationers searching around corners trying to find the bathroom while in the main public spaces. Less than ideal, certainly, but I don’t think it takes too much away visually and lends to a better functional flow.
The exterior is still in development. This is the latest iteration, which I think is getting very close to being “it”. But if we move to ICF walls, then there will be a whole new design discussion that has to be had based on the change in structural type. And there are actually only two roof planes. One plane over the main living space and one over the garage only, sloping away. At this point there is no opportunity for clerestory windows. It was something we talked about in development, but in an effort to keep the roof slope low (even though we are worried about snow load) and to not have unnecessary voids or high ceilings we went with the single shed roof.
Thanks again for your comments and please keep them coming! I always welcome a healthy critique. 🙂