Sylvan Cabins

Sylvan Lodges

Preface:

My goal with this project is to address so many of the issues I have seen when I travel to the mountains of Ruidoso. I notice far too many cab-ins, made of concrete or formed into the shape of Swiss chalets with no regard to how or why they are built that way. It’s time to have aresort set made from the local materials, shaped as nature would build it, and

grown right out of the site on (or in) wich it rests.

Page 1

- Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

- Theoretical Basis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Supporting Theory of Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Architectural Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Potential Design Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Architectural Precedents of Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Addendum Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

- Facility Program Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Existing State / Epistimology of Facility Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Facility Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Mission Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Facility Organization and Layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Key Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Facility Systems Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Design Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Concept Diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . - Activity / Spatial Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Design Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Concept Diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . - Architectural Precedents of Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Addendum Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

- Contextual Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Overview of Project Location and Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Contextual Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Key Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Site Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Analysis of Relevant Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Design Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Concept Diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Architectural Precedents Based on Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Addendum Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .

- Final Response / Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

- Biography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Page 2

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

- Overview - Preface - Table of Contents - Abstract

+ Theoretical Basis

+ Facility Program Description

+ Contextual Description

+ Final Response / Documentation

+ Biography

Assertion:Architecture is a tool for reconnecing man with the natural envi-ronment through the built form and shaping of spaces.

Thesis:The user will discover a greater relationship with nature through the useof materials natural to the area, physically constructing the building into and based on the site, and opening the interior to the outside environment.

Project Scope:A series of cabins arranged along the terrain surrounding a cen-tral meeting and assembly hall. Each cabin will have its own indi-vidual design but will be based on the same theoretical basis. The central assembly hall will be capable of housing numerous sizes of meals, meetings, and events.

Context:The Southwestern shore and canyon near Grindstone Lake in Ruidoso allows a terrain of rock and soil with an ideal composi-tion for building a structure into the mountainside. The site is covered in various types of pine trees and sparse underbrush. The resevoir lake is north of the site and is visible from any point in the canyon.

Page 3

Page 4

Theory

+ Overview

- Theoretical Basis - Supporting Theory of Hypothesis - Architectural Issues - Potential Design Responses - Architectural Precedents of Theory - Addendum Notes + Facility Program Description



+ Biography

Theoretical Basis:So often people become immersed in their daily lives and forget to see the world around them. This is because the world around them is a product of their fast-paced lives. It takes nearly com-plete immersion in the natural world to break the cycle. This resort will allow visitors to rediscover their constitution.

This project makes use of theories that relate the built structure tot he site and have concern for the materials used in the con-struction.

Buildings shouldn’t just sit on the ground of the site taking up room. They should be integrated with the site, their individual identities taken from the site itself. The building could not be built the same anywhere else.

The materials used are of great concern in the facilities. A build-ing born on the equator should not be built out of snow. The materials of the area should be the mainstay of what is used in the facilities here. These are the most influential theories to the project.

Supporting Theories:Architecture of the Wind by Toyo Ito - A building shouldn’t be simply an enclosure of spaces. It should be a place for events to occur. People flow through the space like wind through a plain. The rooms contain actions and movement. Individual, personal spaces exist to decompress from the constaint flow of life out-side. Movement in and around a building is independant of the purpose of the structure. Flows create spaces, Flows should not conform to the shape of the spaces.1

1 Yukio Futagawa, GA Architect Toyo Ito 1970-2001. (Edita Tokyo 2002) 16.Page 5

+ Overview

- Theoretical Basis - Supporting Theory of Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Architectural Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Potential Design Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Architectural Precedents of Theory . . . . . . . . . . . - Addendum Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + Facility Program Description



+ Biography

Supporting Theories:

Prairie Architecture by Frank Lloyd Wright - A building is an exten-sion of the site from which it emerges. It can only be built on the site it is built because it is made to be a part of the natural condi-tions of the location. The slope, shape, light and airflow of the site help to make it what it is. If the house is built into the Plains, it should incorporate the openness and never-ending skyline into its layout.1 Transitions from outdoor to indoor take place through turns and changes in line-of-sight.

Organic Architecture as interpreted by Imre Makovecz - It is just as important to the success of a building that it be connected with its environment. This can be accomplished by harness-ing the natural materials native to the site in constructing the structure(s0. An organic approach means using every aspect of the natural state including the topography and surface of the site. Buildings should bridge the land and sky as if they are a part of the site itself. Construction should be completed in a manner consistent with the natural state of the materials used.2

1 William Allin Storrer, The Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright. (MIT Press Cambridge 1978). 38.2 Janos Gerle, Architecture as Philosophy: The Work of Imre Makovecz, (Budapest, 2007). 6.

Page 6

+ Overview




+ Biography

Diagram 1: The natural limestone shale, of which the mountains surrounding the site are composed, becomes the base material for the construction of the cabins and central hall.

Diagram 2: The native pine wood of the surround-ing forest makes an excellent build-ing material for shingles, clapboard, and structure alike.

Page 7

Architectural Issues and Design Responses:Materials used in construction - The materials used in teh con-struction of the facility should be from the local area and in as close to their natural state as possible.

+ Overview




+ Biography

Diagram 3: Branches of trees, streams and rivers all grow and expand with maximum angle of divergence. Structural members will form in the same way, for maximum load bearing.

Construction techniques employed - The tech-niques used in assembly of the buildings should cater to the naturalstrengths of the materials and allow the facility to flow into the landscape as easily as possible.

Expression of organic principles in the structure - Using the growth pat-terns of trees and plantsas a base expression of beams and columns, the structural load will be more evenly and smoothly distributed.

Diagram 4: The internal strucutre forms a frame similar to the branches of a tree. The angle can never exceed a certain degree. In plants, this is for the smooth flow of nutri-ents, in strucutre it is for the even distribu-tion of load.

Page 8

Architectural Issues and Design Responses:

+ Overview




+ Biography

Diagram 6: Each structure will be placed within the natural topography along its preformed curves like a protrusion of stone would rest cantilevered out.

Expression of architecture as reflective of the site - The building must respond to the natural site conditions by not simply lying on the land, but being built into the moun-tainside and jutting out just as natural rock outcroppings might.

Diagram 5: The facilities will be arranged on the site to make the best use of the ter-rainand allow the ntural flow of the land to continue as much as possible.

Page 9

Architectural Issues and Design Responses:Relate architecture to its environment - Another way to relate the building to its environment is in its relation to the physical design of its site, topography, shape, access points, vistas, and even water drainage. This can be accomplished by placing buildings along the contours and allowing natural water drainage to occur and orienting windows to embrace the north-ern light facing the lake.

+ Overview




+ Biography

Page 10

Theoretical Precedents:Frank Lloyd Wright designed using an idea central to my thesis, unification of the building with the site. Falling Water, as an example, seems to grow from the site. This is achieved by building with the stone materials of the cliff both as large masses and as a facia material jutting out from the cliff with strong horizontal lines similar to the way striations of the stone formed naturally over time. The waterfall, in addition, is allowed to flow not just near, but actually under the building itself. The building has a staircase leading down to the water, allowing a visitor to reach down and touch the flowing water.1

1 Storrer, op.cit. pg 42.

+ Overview




+ Biography

Page 11

Theoretical Precedents:Imre Makovecz’s Dobogoko Ski Lodge also addresses the concept of building with the natural materials of the area. These lodge buildings look as if they were formed on site by felling a few trees and the piling of dirt. The construction takes into consideration how each of the materials would connect to any other surface type. Structural members widen toward the base, and shingles lay as canopy leaves. the buildings also seem to be intrinsic to the site’s shape and vise-versa. Hills rise and fall from the distance, as they move closer to the site, the building emulates that flow of surface and shape. Even textural changes occur similar to the way nature would manipulate terrain.1

1 Gerle, op.cit. pg 12.

+ Overview




+ Biography

Page 12

Theoretical Precedents:Toyo Ito’s design philosophy is of event planning instead of space plan-ning. Houses are viewed as curved fields of moving inhabitants, having little or no weight,” but illuminated “by nature.”1 As each cabin in my thesis and the central conference hall opens to the outside world, the breeze the breeze doesn’t just move through the building, it flows through the inside, just as it does on the outside. The open plan allows a physical connection to the outside nature. The idea that the whole buik of a building should be air and not material holds true to both Ito and organic architecture. As an additional natural connection, the roof panel allows a diffused light tp penetrate and flood the space with daylight.

1 Futugawa, op.cit. pg 28.

+ Overview




+ Biography

Page 13

Addendum Notes:

With each theory I use to help define y project’s scope, there-by limiting the

reach of the work, I also came across more ways to connect with nature.

This connection is more an emotional and a psychological one than a physi-

cal. Visitors will mkae their own way through the resort. It is the job of the

design to show them what is possible.

Page 14

Facility

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis

- Facility Program Description - Existing State / Epistimology of Facility Type - Facility Synthesis - Mission Statement - Goals and Objectives - Facility Organization and Layout - Key Issues - Facility Systems Analysis - Design Requirements - Concept Diagrams - Activity / Spatial Analysis - Design Requirements - Concept Diagrams - Architectural Precedents of Facility - Addendum Notes



+ Biography

Page 15

Facility Program Description:The complex will consist of a number of cabins arranged following the contours of the canyon walls surrounding on three sides of a central meeting center. Each individual cabin will be a different design solution to the theoretical is-sues. The central meeting hall is a multi-use space designed to cater to corporate clients as well as the weekend getaway couples. Morning and dinner meals will be served in the hall for those who choose to dine with other groups staying in the cabins. Each cabin will be an independantly functional short-term home complete with kitchenette. The main hall will also serve for meetings and events in larger groups.

Diagram 7: The site can have any number of building arrangments following the contours.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 16

Space Summary1:

GROSS NETEach Cabin will consist of: SPACE (sf) SPACE (sf) - a kitchen space 150 100 - a dining area 100 75 - living / game rom 200 250 - bathroom (s) 100 75 - bedroom (s) 150 125 - porch or mudroom 75 50 - a day-lit basement 150 125 925 800

The Central Hall of: - central congregation room 2500 2200 - kitchen area 1200 1000 - food storage 500 475 - rest rooms 100 75 - entry foyer 250 250 4550 4000

1 Mary Wilson, Log Cabin Studies: The Rocky Mountain Cabin. (USDA Forest Service 1984). 12.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 17

Facility Epistemology:

Each of the cabins will be a self-sufficient living space consisting of:

- a kitchen space - a dining area - living / gaming room - bathroom(s) - bedroom (s) - proch or mudroom - a day-lit basement

The central hall will serve breakfast and dinner to those who choose to partake, as well as functioning as a large congregation space.

- central room - kitchen area - food storage - restrooms - entry foyer

Diagram 8: Each circle relates to rooms relevant to the events that will occur within the space.

Diagram 9: The rooms have only occasional or intermittent use and rearranged to maxi-mize this use.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 18

Mission Statement:

The cabins and meeting hall in the woods will reintroduce visitors to the natural world. Visitor will be disconnected from the city and reacquainted with the nature surrounding them.

Organization and Layout:

The individual structures will be on a hillside following the natural contours of the area. They will face a common center where multi-use meeting hall out onto the water. This communal space will also act as a meeting area for corporate clients.

Goals and Objectives:

Each cabin will be a place for visitors to relax, recuperate and enjoy nature. These cabins offer an alternative to the dense urban lifestyle most visitors will be used to. At the same time, the meeting hall will provide a place for large groups to congregate.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 19

Key Issues:

Some key issues are: how does the building relate to the site, what will the building be made of, how the building will be constructed and how do the cabins relate to the forest around them. Circulation inside each facilityas well as between the buildings is of great impor-tance. The flow of light and air througout the structures will define part of the natural connection.

Diagram 11: interior space example of log cabin as a connection to the outside

Diagram 10: The sun passes over the canyon in the south at a declination of betwen 3.5 and33.5 degrees.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 20

Design Requirements:

The construction must be composed of at least 75 percent of the natural materials of the area. Every Structure must have the north facing wall sealable against the weather. Parking must be on the up-per slope so as not to ruin the view off of the balcony.

Diagram 13: The view is unconstrained by parking, storage, or facility structures.Diagram 12: North face canbe secured

against the weather through a physical boundary such as bi-fold panelling or shuttters.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 21


At least 50 percent of the exterior wall must be operable for air flow.

At least 65 percent of the exterior wall must allow light from the outside.

The construction must be composed of at least 75 percent of the natural materials of the area.

Diagram 15: At least 65 percent of teh exte-rior wall must permit light passage

Diagram 14: At least 50 percent of the exterior wall can be opened for air flow

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 22


The floor layout of the individual cabbins must allow access to teh out-side without passing through more than two rooms.

The floor arrangement must allow a circular air flow and a croos-breeze through the building.

Diagram 17: The floor arrangement must allow a circular air flow and a cross-breeze through the building.

Diagram 16: The floor layout must allow access to the outside through no more than two rooms.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 23


There can be no direct path from any one room from the outside.

The cabin must be built out of the cliff-side. There must be at leastone rest-room per cabin.

The cabin must be built out of the cliff-side.

Diagram 19: The structure should protrude from the mountainside.

Diagram 18: Interior rooms should never have direct access to an exit.

Facility Precedents:

Imre Makovecz’s Vigegrad, Mogoro Hill camping complex is an example of the ideal that a natural development of houses or cabins can allow the flow of air and light through a facility. Integration into the landscape is essential for the structure to exist.1 Each of Makovecz’s cabins form from the natural elements around the local sites. The spatial organization of each structure bases itself on the structural growth patterns of trees, plants, etcetera.

1 Gerle, op.cit. 9

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 24


The study of log cabins completed by the USDA forest service depart-ment provides an understanding as to the construction method per-fected in the Ruidoso area and building arrangements created for the locational climate. Each cabin built in the mountains has the unique signature of the builder and reflects the individual needs of the user. Builders during mining rushes only had the simple supplies and rudi-mentary tools with which to construct their buildings. They had only a basic understanding of physics and geometry, so they based the building forms on the mountains around the location and structure of the trees nearby.1

1 Wilson, op. cit. 78

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 25

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 26


The concept of an organic structure, based and built in nature is explored through Imre Makoveczs Dobogoko Ski Lodge and other constructions in the Hungarian woods.1 The open designs allow a visual and sensorial connection with the natural world around the

visitor. This type of unencum bered plan integrates the user with the world from which the building has sprung. Not only can it be visual,but also aural, olfactory and tactile connection. Movement from the inside to the outside ‘building’ is made a more gentle transition without harsh changes in the internal and external climate.

1 Gerle, op. cit. 7

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 27

Addendum Notes:

Ruidoso has numerous rentable cabins and resorts. But each of these

seem to be “cookie cutter” series of chalets transmuted from Switzer-

land or adobe mud-huts from the red clay of Taos.

Page 28

Context

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis


- Contextual Description - Overview of Project Location and Site - Contextual Synthesis - Goals and Objectives - Key Issues - Site Analysis - Analysis of Relevant Context - Design Requirements - Concept Diagrams - Architectural Precedents Based on Context - Addendum Notes


+ Biography

Page 29

Contextual Description:

The site is off of Grindstone Lake, a stocked fishing lake by permitonly with limites vehicular access. The area, while not officially a part of the village, follows the city ordinance system established for the Village of Ruidoso. There are a series of private homes about half of a mile away, along the other side of the lake adjacent to the road. The lake contains all rain drainage and runoff from a series of small rivulets.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 30

Site Location:

The site is located on the south shore of Grindstone Lake in Lincoln County, New Mexico, just two miles south of Ruidoso city proper. The site is covered with trees and is home to a wide variety of small wildlife. It looks over the Grindstone Lake Resevoir to the north. Through the middle of the site, during some times of the year, a small rivulet off of Rio Ruidoso drain-ing into the lake.

Diagram 20: A view across the lake from the base of the site. This is what visitors will see from the shore.

Diagram 21: The trees on the site have already been thinned for fire safety, The largest ones left to thrive.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 31

Contextual Synthesis:

The facility should have as little impact on the surrounding for-est as possible. The intent of this site location is to make the best use of the natural landscape. This landscape includes the plant and animal life, the topography and scenic vistas.

Goals and Objectives:

- Integrate cabins into site topography - Allow meeting hall a view of lake - Direct drainage away from site - Maintain the treeline surrounding the site to buffer sound and peripheral vision of the city

Diagram 22: The site has an already well developed forested area surrounding it which helps buffer the area from the noise of any local development. Maintenance of this treeline will enhance the feeling of isolation in nature.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 32

Performance Requirements and Design Solutions:The cabins by themselves might be able to exist as a short-term home while respecting the whole and main issues.

Location of the building on the site - The cabins must be located in semicircular shape following the natural topography of the canyon around the central meeting hall.

Parking on site in comparison to buildings - Parking should be uphill of all constructed facilities so as not to block the contextual vista.

Diagram 23: Parking should be placed so as not to block the views of the canyon and the lake.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 33

Performance Requirements and Design Solutions:Visual connection of cabins to meeting hall / conference center - The cabins will be connected to the main hallvia a winding path through the ashared central area.

Access to site and Serice access on site - Site access will be through a meandering forest roadway uphill of the resort and all movement on the site will be by way of small footpaths.

Diagram 24: The paths moving around the site and to the main buildings should flow naturally through the site. They will begin the resemble the paths roots take as they grow into the soil just as the buildings will grow into the canyon wall more over time.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 34

Site Analysis:

The small canyon containing the site has an average slope of 26 degrees. It overlooks a breeding and fishing lake just south-west of Ruidoso, New Mexico.

The site has an average elevation of 6560 feet at 105.75 Degrees West; 3.4 Degrees North1

1 http://gorp.away.com/gorp/resource/us_national_forest/nm/nm_linco_5.htm

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 35

Analysis of Relevant Context:

The surrounding forest and nearby lake form a boundary to the physically occupiable area as well as a connection to the natural landscape. The lake is a stocked, public fishing resevoir with limited vehicular access. Average rainfall at the lake is around 23” per year, average snowfall is around 37” per year.1 The veg-attion native to the area ranges from semi-desert plants, pin-ion pine and juniper spruce, fir and high elevation grasses and forbs. In Summer, temperatures range from the low 40’s up to a humid 80 Degrees throughout the day. Springtime is usually dry and windy while July and August are the rainy months, with frequent afternoon showers and thunderstorms. The combina-tion of high elevation and abundant moisture result in an array of color from flowering plants during the summer months. In the fall, the oaks, maples and aspensadd splashes of color to the hillside.2


- renewable / refillable attractor for local wildlife - natural landscaping materials that blend into the surrounding forest - manufacture contours to maintain natural water drainage through oraround the site

1 http://www.weather.gov2 GORP, op. cit.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 36

Contextual Precedents:

Frank Lloyd Wright’s Robie House and other Prairie Houses exhibits not only traits of their locations, but seemed to em-body the personality of the sites.1 Robie was constructed on a relatively flat location in the midst of a level plain, it took on the qualities of that site. The low, sweeping roofs, horizontal orientation of construction materials such as brick, concrete, etcetera follow the natural lay of the land. The generous horizontal stripes of windows and door openings on the build-ing allow the interior to feel very open to the exterior. Entries on multiple sides of the building make accessing the outside and moving through the building into simple flow. Multiple changes in direction during this movement (all the while hav-ing a view of the outside) makes the entire horizon link visu-ally.

1 Yukio Futagawa, Frank Lloyd Wright: Prairie Houses. (Edita Tokyo 2001), 37.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 37

Contextual Precedents:

The Spencer Theater, 8 miles north of Ruidoso, is designer to relate the mountains in the distance, as well as the plateauin which it sits to any visitor. The smooth planes contrast with the anturally angular and jagged adges of the mountain’s profile as seen on both sides. This approach of endearing the building to the site by contrasting its form with the natural terrain creates a link between the basis of form and the simplicity of shapewhich the theater can make the best use. A lesson to be learned from this precedent is that a connection with the landscape does not have to be a literal imitation of the form the mountains take, ut an iconic repre-sentaion in some cases. The integration of the building into the local context is completed through the materials. The outside is finished in limestone flecked with mica to resemble the surrounding mountains and limestone base whit which it is built. The ground level glazing allows visitors to view the mountains and local weather.1

1 Karen D. Stein, “Perfomring Arts Theater, Spencer Theater,” Architectural Record (May 1998): 152-159.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




+ Biography

Page 38

Addendum Notes:

The experience of a visitor will be different every time. The individual cabins offer unique stays.

It is as a whole that the complex reltes to the area and allows users to bond with Ruidoso apart of the city. There is more to the mountains and canyons of the area than the casinos and skiing.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis



- Final Response / Documentation - Process - Response - Description + Biography

Page 39

Final Response:

After a semester of refining the ideas behind the cabins, the layout maintained its original cohesion, but the cabin designs changed radically to better fit the site specifics.

Process - It was found that the individual cabins function better to isolate and release a visitor when they are of a small-er and more cozy size. So, the overall floor space was essen-tially cut in half while the open feel of the interiors was main-tained with high roofs and post a beam construction wherever needed.

Lessons were learned from the precedents and new studies done into the vernacular of similar regions, and more em-phasis was placed on the view out from the cabin and shared spaces between the buildings than was previously employed.

A photo study was done on the site to see what vistas the cab-ins might capture. It was settled that the face on the side of the lake should be as much glass or open surface as possible. Large panels should be used to minimize mullions and breaks in the facade could be better controlled.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




Page 40

Final Response:

Response - To better demonstrate the response to isu\sues in the project, they will addressed one by one.

Site Layout - The buildings were arranged to allow a visitor to have the feeling of privacy in the interior and porch spaces while never restricting the view of the canyon below or the lake and beyond.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




Page 41

Final Response:

Cabin 1 - This cabin is a smaller version meant for one small family or a couple. It uses vertical displacement to isolate within the building and a partially enclosed porch to allow private viewing of the vista.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




Page 42

Final Response:

Cabin 2 - Designed more for a larger group or people wishing to sleep in separated areas, this cabin relies on an openness to the outside and natural air flow within the sleeping “porches” as a connection to the outside.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




- Biography

Page 43

Bibliography:

Feuerstein, Gunther. Biomorphic Architecture: Menschen und Tiergestaltenin der Architektur = Human and Animal Form. Geneva, 2002.

Futagawa, Yukio, ed. Frank Lloyd Wright Prairie Houses. To-kyo, EDITA, 2002.

Futagawa, Yukio, ed. GA Architect Toyo Ito 1970-2001. Tokyo, EDITA, 2001.

Gerle, Janos, ed. Architecture as Philosophy: The Work of Imre Makovecz. Edition Axel Menges, 2006.

GORP by Orbitz Away. Lincoln National Forest http://gorp.away.com/gorp/resource/us_national_forest/nm/nm_linco_5.htm.

Lynn, Greg. Folds, Bodies & Blobs: Collected Essays. New York, Gilles Deleuze, 1990.

National Weather Service. NOAAhtp://www.weather.gov

Stein, Karen D. “Performing Arts Theater; Spencer Theater” Architectural Record., (May 1998) pp 152-159.

Storrer, William Allin. The Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright. MIT Press, Cambridge, 1978.

United States. USDA Forest Service. Log Cabin Studies: The Rocky Mountain Cabin. Washington GPO, 1984.

+ Overview

+ Theoretical Basis




- Biography

Page 44

Bibliography:

Wood, Robert Snyder. “Hillside Platforms.” Western Architect and Engineer vol 221 1961 p 36-41.

Wood, Robert. “Vacation Houses,” House and Home, vol. 40, no. 5 pp. 76-83, 1971.

Documents

Sylvan Cabins