OK it has been a few weeks. Following the Sauna workshop, which is now over one month ago, we spent a couple of weeks in some sort of preparation for the Sandane workshop where we were to build some 'Gapahuks' or outdoor sleeping shelters. Each of us took turns with the workload as we all went on little trips around Norway. The work we did achieve took off from the design work I've previously discussed which generally arrived at a few detached shelters in the forest with sleeping above, a multipurpose storage / sitting / sleeping below and some platforms oriented around fireplaces. Discussion around spaces with differing levels of privacy. Here is the image again below.

So over the three weeks before the Sandane workshop we did some reworking of the layout between the trees, refined the dimensions for the structure in order to attain some quantities as well as some general preparation. The Grasshopper script previously designed for the proposed CNC milled foundations was somewhat discarded as their production was to blow out the budget. However as the design arrived at identical rectangular structures, the foundations no longer needed to accommodate separate complex junctions of which the script and CNC technology would be utilised. As such several foundations were made using the workshop CNC and the left over timber from the Sauna workshop by cutting pads with four insertion points for each column. Some plans were drawn up on Rhino to overcome excessive further discussion upon arriving on site and then we got ready to leave.

Then on Friday the 23rd of October we met at the workshop with a little panel van packed with tools and things, and a 9 seater van with students and bags, and drove the 10 or so hours to Sandane. Over the workshop we mostly stayed at a school close to the site which also had a workshop of which we could use. There was also a CLT production company close by of which we were hoping to attain some cheap materials, and another local mill of which we could get some free left over offcuts we could use for cladding. So on the Saturday we drove to the CLT factory, and took some free offcuts with fairly limited thought onto how were would use it as cladding and checked out the factory owners house under construction primarily of CLT.

Then the day after we got onto site. To get there we walked along a path for 10 or so minutes, which became muddier everyday, and immediately began to redesign or layout the units for the first time while actually being on site. I can say at least for myself that envisioning the site from the photographs and the 3D scan isn't really enough. How the edges of the site taper off, gauging the spaces in between the trees, proportion etc. So this is an important thing not to skip in the process, as everybody I'm sure already knew, as seeing these first hand altered our perception of the project. Perhaps this was an affordable exercise in an educational environment to reiterate such a thing. So we worked in a big group, measuring out sizes, discussing layouts, orientation, spaces in the between the shelters, opportunities such as the trees and rock face, view etc. This fairly quick discussion arrived at the removal of the proposed kitchen unit, initially located centrally as shown in the image above, and some reshuffling of the layout.

The following day we began shifting large rocks acting as foundations beneath the agreed upon columns. A couple of students prepared a frame which acted as a template to set out the foundations at the corners of each structure. So using this we made the large rocks square and level enough upon which to attached to columns of which others students were assembling back at the workshop. Once the columns began to arrive, we set the template in place, drilled through the prefabricated footings, removed these, set expansion bolts into the holes, then attached and bolted each column in place. The images below will explain this a bit better.

So without going into it day by day some major decisions we made throughout the workshop, additionally to the aforementioned set out, included the upper and lower levels of each platform, roof height and orientation and the cladding for each unit. As the columns began to go up the first shelter arranged its floor levels with fairly similar dimensions to those initially proposed. The second and third shelters however shifted in response to the first and the surrounding landscape. The image below gives insight into the new layout although it does skip a few steps in the construction process. Very poor quality panorama but further images should explain the project better.

Generally each shelter was constructed by three separate groups organised fairly automatically which shifted a bit here and there. Across all groups discussions revolved around proposed use of the ground floor, Australian ground floor that is (Norwegian first floor), which dictated the height of the 'first floor' above. Whether that be sitting, sleeping, storage etc. The roof on the first unit on the left was oriented towards the second unit in response to the intimate space unfolding between them. This orientation also aimed to provide shelter from the wind which was told to come from the fjord as seen in the photo above. This platforms consisted of two 2"x6" bearers that ran through the centre of the columns and 2"x6" floor joints at 600 centres projecting out past the bearers where necessary to create some little platforms and sitting areas around the fire. The roof on the central shelter was pitched the opposite direction upon the realisation that 'first floor' beams that had been projected and secured to the rock face for bracing actually provided an interesting alternate access to the top of the rear embankment. As this played out the third unit, of which I was primarily involved, seemed to muck around with quite a few experimental changes. As the space in between the trees was limited the footprint was reduced early on then due to the vertical nature of several surrounding trees the height was increased to give a more vertical nature by increasing the 'first floor' level and in tern ground floor ceiling height which also enabled individual use. This also required a ladder made of round timber members protruding from the column beside the tree. Additional bits included a fire wood box on the side with minimal eaves on the sides responded as what seemed appropriate throughout construction to surrounding trees and form. Each of the ground level platforms and roofs surrounded one tree which was a nice little extra.

The final work for the project was the cladding for each shelter. The material that was made available to us included the scrap CLT and natural tree offcuts mentioned previously, but also some thin timber strips which were weaved to create this quite nice refined Japanese aesthetic. Initially we had thought to ration the the materials between each unit, with a mix of cladding but at one point an idea came up to give each unit one of each type. Initially I wasn't too sure but once you have a think and look at something for a while I was all about it. The tree house, the tea house and the rude word that got given to the CLT house. There was limited amount of material available and each "team" had to utilise it efficiently. The CLT was split even further to get more surface area which were then compiled like bricks with ins and outs for aesthetic and shelving. The team on the 'tea house' (stupid names we came up with at some point by the way) clad two walls on the top and bottom oriented to surrounding spaces. All the walls they made were very nice particularly in the short amount of time available. Then finally the tapered tree face offcuts on the 'tree house' had to be staggered due to their natural taper, marked out and cut with a chainsaw to fit and despite this did so fairly well. Id imagine some looking at the final project might have some trepidation with these materials but it was simply what was available and because of this makes it all the more nicer.

What I thought.

So we sat down on the last day and everyone had a turn at expressing their thoughts on the project in order to encourage a little reflection. What everyone enjoyed, successes, mistakes. For me the group work was another thing that I need to continually work on. Taking time to consider every point made by others, being open to suggestions and passing on thoughts without being opinionated. I'm not painting myself the best but they were just thoughts I had. Pasi made a suggestion to consider moments and decisions and as to which are individual, small and entire group decisions. How to know when to come back and discuss things and when to push forward. He made reference to situations in the past where because of the constant discussion back and forth no actual work was done.

Then the building was simply building really. It was nice to do and it was surprising that the decisions were largely our own. Pasi and Sami would of course provide some guidance here and there, make design suggestions in our discussions, but we would push forward with everything as we saw fit. The aforementioned decisions of the floor levels, roof orientation, platforms and cladding in the end were our own. I even found myself needing a little guidance, particularly with our 'experimental' structure, not wanting to make concrete decisions that were wrong, done and irreversible. But I found there was a time to go with the flow and not be too insistent with all the contest. Being self designed and constructed whether some of these were wrong most definitely could be insisted, but in an educational environment it is nice to have such a luxury and be able to reflect upon it.

So this was a good exercise in construction and design. Project work encompassing greater learning would include factors of project economics, logistics, greater client liaison etc. with further matters where relevant, however the timeframe was a factor.