Timber Outbuildings.

[andrew gayton]

Dear all - in the provision of new timber frame out buildings / ancillary buildings, would it be 'correct' to slavishly duplicate past forms of constructional detail (looking for a consensus) - Gayton

 

[Gareth Hughes]

Dear all - in the provision of new timber frame out buildings / ancillary buildings, would it be 'correct' to slavishly duplicate past forms of constructional detail (looking for a consensus) - Gayton

Depends on the overall intention of the design.

If intending to produce a building of "mediaeval" (or whatever period) character, then yes.

If intending to encourage the continuing tradition of timber frmaing, then no, unless the detail is appropriate to the specific purpose.

If doing a half-hearted "looks a bit like it's old (has a pitched roof and clay tiles) but it's not really (lots of concrete, breezeblock base courses etc.)" then you should be ashamed of yourself.
-Hughes

 

[Gareth Hughes]

oops, posted that twice, sorry.

 

[andrew gayton]

Hughes - In the instance that it is a brand new framed structure copying all the detail one might observe in a medieval /and later frame ..... in the form of a glazed addition to an extant structure? - Gayton

 

[Nemesis]

Juts cos Curl does it is there any need for you two to follow suit?

Look - as long as it's not in uPVC be thankful.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

Hughes - In the instance that it is a brand new framed structure copying all the detail one might observe in a medieval /and later frame ..... in the form of a glazed addition to an extant structure? - Gayton

Gayton - Then I think the question revolves more about the elegance and appropriateness of the glazing details, and how said glazing is incorporated into the overall design.

Sounds like the sort of case where I'd perhaps suggest not going down the historicist route at all and (if possible) doing a very crisp and simple all-glass number. -Hughes

 

[andrew gayton]

as in james steven curl??

 

[Gareth Hughes]

as in james steven curl??

Yup (this is a referecne to the referring to each other by surnames, not doing mediaeval timber frames)

 

[Nemesis]

One and the same.

 

[Nemesis]

I have to say though, I find some of these a tad OTT - I think maybe the swimming pool cover for example...


http://www.ehbp.com/goto.php



Less is more and it is possible to have sympathetic work without aping the past where it possibly is too dominant.

Not outbuildings and slightly at a tangent... but if I was building a new house I would want it not to be something which I think could be described as 'pastiche' olde England.

 

[biffvernon]

Juts cos Curl does it is there any need for you two to follow suit?

Gosh, I had to take quite a few runs at that sentence.

would it be 'correct' to slavishly duplicate past forms of constructional detail

Some of those constructional details were there because they really are useful for all time, others were useful when there was plenty of skilled labour and no power tools. Good design does not have to be a slavish copy of past design.