Design critique - modern vs traditional style, and dormers...

[ETC]

[AliG]

The first drawings that we got for our house had the first floor around 1.75 storeys high with similar dormers. I hated it and we raised the roof.

 

I think what you have done, making the dormers more symmetrical on the side elevation is a big improvement. I don't know if this involved rejigging the interior. The en suite doesn't need a dormer and that window doesn't line up with a window below so looks very out of place.

 

Why not make bed 4 window a velux., then if you have a velux in bedroom 4 and the ensuite for bed 3 they line up with the window and door below and you don't have the velux being so close to the dormer which looks fussy. Bed 2 ensuite could also be a velux and then you are just left with the bedroom 3 dormer.

 

Now bedroom 3 I have some issues with. I understand the T-shape and it might look better in real life, but that gable sticking out of the roof looks awful on the front elevation. It also looks bad on the side elevation where as noted it looks like you have a little extension jutting out there. Just looking at it was the house designed and then the bed 1 ensuite and dressing room added in later? I think it is spoiling the house actually, probably made worse by highlighting it in stone. It might look better if you remove all the upstairs dormers in bed 2 and the gable and give it a sloped ceiling all the way round.

 

I'd tell you to rejig downstairs to lose the sticking out bit, but the foundations are in.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[nod]

On 27/10/2022 at 20:22, nod said:

Don’t underestimate the cost 

We settled on an arts and crafts design for the roof

While they do look nice and will st your build apart from others 

Our trusses and loose rafters will cost around 12k Another thousand on lead 13 K on slates 

Laboure would cost a fortune I’ve been on it two weeks and I’m no where near finished 

I spent two days cutting birds mouths into the trusses prior to the crane arriving 

ready for BC inspection on Thursday 

A lot of work getting it to this stage 

I’ve just to do the lead work and slate it 

[ETC]

7 hours ago, AliG said:

The first drawings that we got for our house had the first floor around 1.75 storeys high with similar dormers. I hated it and we raised the roof.

 

I think what you have done, making the dormers more symmetrical on the side elevation - Now the proposed front elevation - is a big improvement. I don't know if this involved rejigging the interior. Not for the first option but I did change the second option. The en suite doesn't need a dormer and that window doesn't line up with a window below so looks very out of place. Difficult to build/have a dormer window (in what was a bedroom in the first option) and have a window on the ground floor due to the single storey outshot. I did consider not having a window on the ground floor for the very reason you have highlighted.

 

Why not make bed 4 window a velux., then if you have a velux in bedroom 4 and the ensuite for bed 3 they line up with the window and door below and you don't have the velux being so close to the dormer which looks fussy. Bed 2 ensuite could also be a velux and then you are just left with the bedroom 3 dormer. The design isn’t finished and I haven’t had a chance to coordinate the plans and elevations. A work in progress.

 

Now bedroom 3 I have some issues with. I understand the T-shape and it might look better in real life, but that gable sticking out of the roof looks awful on the front elevation. How else can you get a dormer window which the OP wants to look any different? It also looks bad on the side elevation where as noted it looks like you have a little extension jutting out there. But that is what it will look like! Just looking at it was the house designed and then the bed 1 ensuite and dressing room added in later? No - take a look at the original posted drawings. I think it is spoiling the house actually, probably made worse by highlighting it in stone. The OP wants to use stone and changing the material is a means to defining the side “extensions” It might look better if you remove all the upstairs dormers in bed 2 and the gable and give it a sloped ceiling all the way round. Not sure what you mean here.  Have you looked at the original drawings?

 

I'd tell you to rejig downstairs to lose the sticking out bit, but the foundations are in.

 

 

7 hours ago, AliG said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

@AliGThe alternative plans don’t really tie up with the elevations and were done in isolation and were prepared for the OP to show what could be achieved if some of the internal layout was changed. I’ve added comments to your text above.

 

The idea is to create a symmetrical front elevation and then to take those design elements and apply them to the rest of the dwelling. I am restricted in what I can do - due to the foundations being in but my hands aren’t totally tied - there are ways and means of building various options and existing foundations can always be used or ignored.

 

PS - this is stylised to reflect what the OP has asked for. Feel free to post your own solution - I would genuinely like to see your proposal.

[AliG]

Sorry for the confusion, I was referring to the original drawings by @Lord Greyabbeyand the adjusted ones he posted not the ones that you posted @etc. I should have made that clearer. I did think of copying them in to show which pics I was talking about, I should have done that.

 

Original drawings

 

 

 

Improved side elevation, but still a number of issues especially that gable sticking out of the roof and the added on look of the area where the bed 1 ensuite an dressing room are.

 

 

 

[Lord Greyabbey]

@AliG Yes, I am conversing with @ETC about design options both inside and out - a lot to think about, and a lot of good ideas being bandied about. 

 

Will post some updates once we get to that point.  But in summary, much happier with the current direction the design is travelling in!!

[ETC]

Initial design drawings posted below for context.

[ETC]

My final design proposals posted below.

[ETC]

[ETC]