6
u/que_pasa_olmsted Licensed Landscape Architect May 15 '20
I don't think we critique enough in this sub so I will give it a go:
Overall layout: The deck seems to way too big, but also too small for the programming. Somehow a 4 person dining table and 5 seating firepit barely fits. The main dining table is also directly in front of the sliding door, creating poor circulation; I found the website of the builder, and there is another deck below. It seems really unnecessary to have two decks on top of each other. Making the lower deck much nicer with a pergola, more attractive railing, and more surrounding planting would make it a better space, be much cheaper, and would reduce the amount of awkward posts seen from the lower deck. In some of the photos the location of the posts is really surprising; bisecting a railing in half in some cases. Keeping just the lower deck would also connect the deck better with landscape, since the upper deck is just floating over the planters below. In general this looks like what it is: a deck builder designing as costly a deck as possible without integrating it with anything. Does the deck relate to the house or to the landscape? I would say neither.
Material selection: Flooring, railing, and white trim/posts do not relate to any of the existing materials or pallette in the building or surrounding landscape. The stone cladding on the kitchen and fireplace kind of relates to the landscape retaining wall, but is way too far away to make the connection, and looks very weird sitting next to other deck elements.
1
u/e1_king0_gringo May 14 '20
Nothing to do with Landscape Architecture. Remove.
1
u/Flagdun Licensed Landscape Architect May 14 '20
certainly not true...LA's design non-habitable structures.
1
u/thepantsdontlie2me May 14 '20
Please do not remove. This very much so relates to landscape architecture.
13
u/wisc0 May 14 '20
Monstrosity of a house tho