Author Topic: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions  (Read 7679 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DavidLeBlanc

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
  • Seattle, WA - the Emerald City
Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« on: March 19, 2005, 10:39:22 AM »
1. Can one build more than one BC (for the same house/person) from a single set of plans? I'm thinking of building a "T" consisting of 2 BC's - or a 12' bedroom/office/bath/center loft/temp kitchen wing built to BC standards and a BC leg for the main room/kitchen. The BC main room/kitchen would be a 2nd phase of construction.

2. Would I save much money if I built a 12' x ?? to BC standards compared to building a 14' x ?? to BC standards? How much more if I built to VC standard (16' x ??)? Even a rough estimate would help here... Also, is there going to be a whole lot of difference in the time required to build 12'/14'/16'? How about cost - does going from 14' to 16' put one into a new cost level due to using larger lumber and/or engineered lumber products (LVL, gluelam)?

3. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the VC plans don't include the BC plans? If so, do you still offer the supplement as you did before?

4. Is it possible to build a gable exactly opposite a shed dormer? I'm wondering about the rafter engineering and that I'll likely pay to have a ridge beam engineered in to avoid collar ties.

5. Does the Enchilada kit include the bonus tools (solar slide rule & protractor) in the little house kit?

My notion is to build a 12' or 14' building with the long axis N-S that would contain an office (standing as the main room at first) at the north end, with a generous laundry/bath S of that and a 5' or so wide hall that would house the kitchen at first and a bodacious storage area later, with a nice closet and bedroom at the S end. The loft would be accessable from the N office and extend only over the hall and bathroom. It would have an E-facing shed dormer opposite the gable that will join it to the addition later.

Later, this building would have a E-W BC added on, opposite the shed dormer (by using a gable that was built as part of the first phase of construction) that would be the "real" main room and kitchen. The cute trick is that the temp kitchen plumbing will be the permanent kitchen plumbing by going out the other side of the same wall that the temp kitchen starts out on - just flipping it into the new space. This BC would be shorter than the plans call for by the depth of the kitchen and bath space shown on the current BC plans, more or less. (The loft would extend into the new space over the new kitchen.)

I'd end up with an office, 2 bedrooms (1 in the loft, one on the main floor!) and a decent sized main room and kitchen. The "T" layout would provide some visual interest compared to a long 14 or 16' rectangle (which, to me, sniffs of a mobile home).

I wonder if the east facing shed dormer would make the house look a bit strange viewed from the south... nah! :)
« Last Edit: March 19, 2005, 10:43:17 AM by DavidLeBlanc »

Offline John Raabe

  • Administrator
  • Journeyman
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,548
  • Whidbey Island, WA
    • CountryPlans - About Us
Re: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2005, 02:26:54 PM »
Yes, you could use the plans in such a combined project.

Costs are pretty much a factor of square footage. The Little house plans with the simpler foundation and 2x4 walls will cost less per SF than the cold weather code level plans of the Builder's Cottage or Victoria's.

The Builders cottage is part of the Enchilada plans and is a different set from Victoria's cottage. I no longer offer the upgrade from the LH to the enchilada (got too complex explaining things).

4- Don't understand question. Maybe a sketch would help.

5 - yes
None of us are as smart as all of us.

Offline DavidLeBlanc

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
  • Seattle, WA - the Emerald City
Re: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2005, 05:54:29 PM »
Sketchless in Seattle...

Imagine a roof with a shed dormer on one face of the roof. Is it possible to put a gable on the other face of the roof opposite the shed so that the peak of the gable is centered on the shed dormer?

Kind of sort of like this (plan view):
___________ <- shed side
___|___|___  <- peak of roof
___ _/\_____ <- gable side
« Last Edit: March 19, 2005, 05:59:20 PM by DavidLeBlanc »

Offline John Raabe

  • Administrator
  • Journeyman
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,548
  • Whidbey Island, WA
    • CountryPlans - About Us
Re: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2005, 08:26:01 PM »
Is this what you have in mind?



Is so the answer is yes, the rafters are doubled at the sides of the dormer just as they are in a gable roof. The peak need not stick above the height of the shed roof.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2005, 08:27:11 PM by jraabe »
None of us are as smart as all of us.

Offline DavidLeBlanc

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
  • Seattle, WA - the Emerald City
Re: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2005, 09:03:40 AM »
No, the peak should be on the face of the roof you didn't draw, opposite the shed dormer, not on top of it!

Elevation of front:
__________________
      |           |
____|______|_______

Elevation of back:
__________________
           /\
______/  \___________

Offline DavidLeBlanc

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
  • Seattle, WA - the Emerald City
Re: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« Reply #5 on: March 20, 2005, 09:04:33 AM »
Heh - and so much for ascii "art" ;)

Offline glenn kangiser

  • The Troglodyte
  • Administrator
  • Journeyman
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,926
  • Central California Sierras- Home of Yosemite NP
    • Underground Cabin
Re: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2005, 06:34:40 PM »
How about  gable roof house with ridge running N/S.  There is a Gable roof dormer on the west slope and a shed roof dormer on the east slope ???
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

Offline DavidLeBlanc

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
  • Seattle, WA - the Emerald City
Re: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2005, 09:39:48 AM »
'zactly! :)

Offline John Raabe

  • Administrator
  • Journeyman
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,548
  • Whidbey Island, WA
    • CountryPlans - About Us
Re: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2005, 12:03:56 PM »
OK, let's see if this is what you have in mind...



Nothing unusual about this design, it's done all the time. I would suggest you use a structural ridge board here (perhaps a couple of 12" LVL beams) as the loads from the two sides are not balanced. However, I've seen lots of these done with nothing more than the standard 2x ridge board.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2005, 12:07:31 PM by jraabe »
None of us are as smart as all of us.

Offline DavidLeBlanc

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
  • Seattle, WA - the Emerald City
Re: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« Reply #9 on: March 22, 2005, 09:20:01 AM »
Yes, that's it!

I would bring the gable valleys down to the eves though to link up with the roof of the "T" addition: no sidewalls on the gable.

Thanks! :)

Offline John Raabe

  • Administrator
  • Journeyman
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,548
  • Whidbey Island, WA
    • CountryPlans - About Us
Re: Builder's and Victoria's Cottage questions
« Reply #10 on: March 24, 2005, 05:11:32 PM »
Sure, the gable dormer ridge need not go all the way up to the main roof ridge. Or... you could keep the ridges aligned and change (steepen) the gable dormer pitch so that it slopes from eave to ridge.
None of us are as smart as all of us.

 

Templates: 5: index (default), Ads (default), Portal (default), Display (default), GenericControls (default).
Sub templates: 12: init, html_above, adsheaders_above, body_above, adsindex_above, portal_above, main, portal_below, adsindex_below, body_below, adsheaders_below, html_below.
Language files: 3: SPortal.english (default), index+Modifications.english (default), Ads.english (default).
Style sheets: 1: portal (default).
Files included: 38 - 1132KB. (show)
Cache hits: 13: 0.00147s for 40,849 bytes (show)
Queries used: 28.

[Show Queries]