Water in architecture and water spaces: look, touch, feel

The study expects to see a strong relationship between the presence of water and the
surrounding design of the building. Furthermore, the study hopes to establish a difference in
the relationship between the sensory experience of the two case studies where water is used
as an aesthetic feature and has no practical function compared to the two baths where water is
used to bathe in. The studies are ordered chronologically to enable clear identification of the
evolving architectural differences between the ancient bath building, and the two twentieth
century examples. Investigation aims to explore the potential of water as an instrument to aid
the architects attempts at creating illusion. Aspects such as colour, and representation of form
will be analysed in the two twentieth century examples.
The study will culminate with the contemporary innovation and dynamism so supremely
represented in the work of Peter Zumthor. In this fourth and most important chapter the work
aims to identify how contemporary developments in architectural design in comparison
with the older case studies expands and enriches the relationship between water and the
human senses.
Methodology
The data for this study was collected through documentary research. Chapter one draws from
Barry Cunliffes Roman Bath Discovered as a primary source and archaeological context.The
baths went through several stages of development before they were abandoned: this study
will use the simple plan of the first stage as an example to avoid any confusion. Because of
the age of the case study it is not possible to replicate with certainty the exact nature of the
sensory experience of using the baths. Therefore some suppositions had to be hypothetical
based on the archaeological and architectural evidence used. Throughout the dissertation I
will draw on Veronica Strangs book The Meaning of Water (2003) which provides a useful
insight into the nature of the element in discussion. In the study of Bruno Tauts glass
pavilion the sensory experience will also have to contain a hypothetical element based on
documentary research as the pavilion itself no longer stands. For chapter four, internet
sources were used in conjunction with journals and books to locate a firsthand account of the
sensory experience of Peter Zumthors baths. As a fairly recent design of a relatively
unwritten about architect it was difficult to locate a diversity of sources for the baths so the
chapter will draw mainly from articles both from internet sources and from publications.
Introduction
The first chapter will look at the Roman Baths in Bath, Avon. It will explore the relationship
between the architectural design, the materials used, and the human senses, focusing on the
original plan of the baths in their first phase as depicted by Cunliffe (1971). This chapter will
introductory to the study as it will bring into discussion aspects such as the relationship
between the interior and exterior of the building as perceived through human sensory
experience, and the atmospheric effects created by thermal waters which will be explored
more thoroughly in the final chapter. It will evaluate aspects of the Roman design such as
symmetry, colour, and decoration and how these might have enriched the bathing experience.
Chapter two uses the case study of a glass pavilion, imagined by the poet Paul Scheerbart,
and designed by Bruno Taut in 1914. The ornamental structure was designed to be exhibited
at the Werkbund exhibition and was demolished soon after. The water feature is centrally
placed, designed to reflect the changing light through the multicoloured glass panels of the

surround. Its vision of a Utopian form of architecture using glass prisms provides a unique
contrast to the functionally aesthetic Roman baths. It will be used to develop the idea of
architecture testing the boundaries between the perception of interior and exterior and
between public and private space. The presence of the water and its interaction with the light
from the pavilions coloured glass means that these concepts are explored through sensory
experience. Using relevant source material this chapter constructs an independent
interpretation of Bruno Tauts design, focusing on its inner circular form and tiered space.
In Chapter Three the case study used will be the Piazza dItalia built by Charles W. Moore
between 1974 and 1978 for the Italian community of New Orleans. The Post-Modernist
design is characterised by Moores ironic interpretation of historical forms of architecture
placed around a fountain in the shape of Italy. The study provides a useful contrast to the
previous examples it raises questions of how symmetry in architectural design affects the
sensory perceptions. The focal point of the structure is the water feature which serves as a
paradoxical unifier and separator of the experience. Furthermore, this example brings into
discussion the concept of a more complex relationship between the human senses and water
in architecture which will culminate in the final chapter.
Chapter four concerns the thermal baths at Vals, Switzerland, designed by Peter Zumthor in
1996. This last and most important chapter aims to bring together aspects of the three
previous examples through analysis of a contemporary design. The focus will be on
Zumnors imaginative interpretation of the use of water in a natural environment. Research
into his combination of technical innovation and sensitive perception hopes to establish how
water can be used in contemporary architectural design to enrich the sensory human
experience. Study will also focus on aspects of the design such as the careful attention paid to
achieving balance and unity through features such as the combination of different materials
used. Features of the earlier case studies such as the ambiguity of form in Moores piazza
are discussed in light of Zumthors design of the baths interior. Finally, the study will assess
how successful Zumthors example is in uniting traditional concepts in a contemporary space.

The Roman Bath Buildings at Avon, Bath.

During the first century AD the Temple of Minerva and the baths were built at Bath over a
thermal spring. As part of the building process an enclosed reservoir was constructed with the
point at which the water poured into the drain being open with a flight of large steps from a
platform above, allowing visitors to get close to the source of the water. The opening through
which the water was accessed boasted an impressive archway creating the impression of the
steaming water flowing through the mouth of a cave from the centre of the earth. (Cunliffe
1971, p.26).
The original entrance hall boasted three massive windows through which could be seen the
sacred spring and the altar beyond. The Great Bath would originally have been covered by a
masonry vaulted ceiling also with large windows in its second tier plate xxiv cunliffe. Roman
glass was translucent so the baths would not have been lit as well as an open air pool. This
means that there would have been no views from the windows and little sun, resulting in
minimal interaction between the experience of being inside the building and the conditions
outside. It appears that the lighting of the establishment took second place to the organisation
of space within the interior. Aside from the Great Bath the block contained two smaller
chambers the calidarium (hot room), and tepidarium (a warm acclimatising room) (Rook
1992, p.23-4), and another smaller swimming bath now known as the Lucas bath. (Cunliffe
1971, p.45).

High vaulted spaces covered the thermal waters of the Great Bath to allow the steam to
rise.As Macdonald says of this style of Roman roof, the chief key to the kind of sensory
reaction or emotional response evoked by these buildings was the capacity of their concave
shapes to induce an impression of expanding or rising hollowness.(1982, p.176) The
perception of space inside the baths would indeed have been altered as the bather left the
small heated changing rooms and entered the area of the Great Bath. The warm bubbling
water, with the cooler tranquil space above would have created two contrasting, yet
complementary, sensory experiences. This design meant that the activity of the water
environment could be enjoyed while the eye followed the path of rising vapours, travelling
upwards to the still serenity of the domed roof. Allowing the eye to travel, while bodily
remaining in the same place would have been an integral part of the relaxation process. The
height of the ceiling would have also added to the ambience by causing sounds to echo.
White limestone surrounded the bath which would have been smooth to the touch, and
excavated evidence suggests that statues and other shrine-like images decorated the interior,
with a fountain in the centre. It is possible to imagine how the continually changing state of
the waters would have played upon the surrounding surfaces of the decoration, appearing to
produce variations in colour and texture.
As Veronica Strang says in her publication on water: The mesmeric qualities of water are of
particular interest in considering sensory perception and the creation of meaning. Schiffman
(1996:101) notes that the eye is automatically drawn to flickering or moving stimuli, and Gell
(1992) and Morphy (1991, 1992, 1994) have shown that shimmering or visually exciting
patterns can stimulate affective responses in many different cultural contexts. The shimmer
and brilliance of water provide visual stimuli that are quite different from those of most
objects. The visual interest of inanimate objects is gleaned by the eye actively tracing the
form and colour and detail. With water () the eye is presented with a luminescent image it
cannot hold. Instead, it must simply absorb all of the rhythms of movement and the tiny
shifts and changes. (2003, p.51).
As in contemporary swimming baths it is likely that the Romans would have enjoyed sitting
beside the water to watch the play of light and absorb the atmosphere. From the remains
found at Bath it appears that the design included viewing areas: the bath itself lay in the
centre of an aisled hall 109ft long by 67ft wide, divided into a nave and two side aisles, or
ambulatories, by continuous arcades framed with pilasters and entablature like those in the
entrance hall. Each ambulatory was provided with three exedrae, a central rectangular recess
with semicircular ones on either side, each framed by piers supporting arches in harmony
with the main arcades. (Cunliffe 1976, p.45).
These recesses, placed within a symmetric plan, would have provided places for people to sit
and view the baths, while the continuous arcades would have led the line of vision around the
interior, with the effect of there being no beginning or end. This continuity of form in the
main area reflects its function as a unifying space in two ways: one, architecturally linking
the four different areas of the building, and two, providing a public space befitting of the
social function of bathing itself which brought people together.
To aid the concept of bathing as a social and a sacred experience certain features were
designed to appeal to the human senses. The floors and walls were decorated with mosaic
patterns in different colours; contrasts of colour being common in Roman architecture
(Macdonald 1982, p.176), and as part of the roof structures there stood tall columns in the
decorative Corinthian style. As a sacred place, dedicated to Minerva, the healer, visitors were

tempted to throw offerings into the sacred water of the spring in hope of their wishes being
granted. The act of parting with money or something dear is a ritual made possible by the
spring being situated beneath the main entrance hall. Excavations in 1878 by Mann
discovered valuable offerings including pewter ornaments, a gold earring, and a pin with a
pearl attached. (Cunliffe 1976, p.28). The presence of the water source provides an
enticement to the baths within, and moreover the motion of the spring beneath would have
created a rich bubbling pool easily transforming the solid masonry and concrete walls into an
aesthetically pleasing yet functional space.
The architecture of the baths building appears to have been entirely devoted to the ritual of
bathing itself which occurred inside. As Michael Wheeler says in Roman Art and Architecture
(2001):
you went to the baths in great numbers to talk to and about your friends and to work off the
night-before. But one thing you certainly did not do; you never glanced at the untidy complex
of domes and gables outside as you entered. It was the inside of the building that mattered,
with its towering wall-spaces that stretched the minds of architect and sculptor and gave a
sense of well-being to patron or client. (p.16).
The experience of bathing was completed in a series of stages. The bathers first entered the
dressing room to change, then after being anointed with oil proceeded to the series of main
bathing rooms that varied in temperature (net ref. 1). In the calidarium bathers had their
bodies scraped of oil and perspiration, before entering the frigidarium (cold room), where
there was a small cold pool. The bather then entered the Great Bath. The Romans had no
quantitative measurements for temperature, (Rook 1992, p.13) and despite the use of the
walls as heating in conjunction with under floor heating there would have been relatively
little control over humidity compared to contemporary bath complexes. Walls would have
been damp from capillary moisture seeping up through the porous building materials and
from condensation when warmer humid air came into contact with colder surfaces. This
meant that the light and heat of the bath might have varied according to how many other
people were using it at the time. Certainly, these baths were designed to look their best when
full of people when the waters were moving and the steam rising and breaking in the space
above.
The baths were unique in that they provided a highly esteemed environment (baths were often
owned by emperors) where personal ritual could be conducted in a public space which only
the presence of the water would allow. The baths were peoples palaces, providing a cultural
focus where everyone could enjoy luxury on a regal scale every day. (Rook 1992, p.20). It is
not difficult to imagine the many different smells of different scented oils, steam, and hot
bodies. The baths complex was a wealth of money, leisure and sensual experience, and the
different materials used in the design reflect this. In the hall of the Great Bath lead lined the
pool which met with the limestone beside it. This contrast of material was continued
throughout in the broken forms of mosaic pattern interspersed with bronze objects such as a
bronze sluice in the north-east corner of the main bath. (Cunliffe 1976, p.45).
As expected there appears to be a close relationship between the design of the baths at Avon
and the sensory experience of the spring water which was both a functional and an aesthetic
feature.These two aspects appear to have been integral to one another and it will be
interesting to see how the relationship between architectural design and the human senses
alters in the next case study where water within the glass pavilion is present purely for
aesthetic reasons.

The Glass Pavilion designed by Bruno Taut for the

Werkbund Exhibition, 1914.
This case study looks at the interplay between water, light, and the senses in the early Modern
Expressionist design of Bruno Tauts glass pavilion. The construction was commissioned by
poet Peter Scheerbart who dreamed of a soaring glass architecture as a freeing up of
architectural design. (Crasemann Collins 1962, p.12). It was a fourteen-sided prism roofed by
a dome with blue, green, and gold glass panels which reflected the sky. (Ward 2001, p.65).
Inside was a seven-tiered chamber whose walls were made of glass panels lined with glass
mosaic, and a circular staircase an unreal, unearthly flight of stairs that one descends as if
through sparkling water (Pehnt 1973, p.76). On the lower level there was a rotunda with a
pool and water cascading down layered steps so that the travelling sound of water would have
echoed up to the highest tier. Taut claimed that the structure had been designed in the spirit of
a Gothic cathedral. As Kenneth Frampton (1994) says, In effect a city crown, that
pyramidal form postulated by Taut as the universal paradigm of all religious building, which
together with the faith it would inspire was an essential urban element for the restructuring of
society. (p.116).
This comment is reflected in the use of water as a symbolic unifier in two ways. Firstly as a
physical presence that mirrors the refracted light from the glass panels, creating a harmonic
balance between floor and ceiling and a sense of unity within the structure, and secondly as
something that all living things and people need and understand as an essential part of life
an essential ingredient if you like of Tauts Utopian ideal. When standing at the top of the
water cascade it was possible to see upwards through the circular space in the middle to the
arching space of the upper tiers beyond. This provided a visual contrast between the fluid
downward movement of water and the arching pyramidal form of the roof above. Further
visual delights were to be found in the wealth of colours used in the design. The cascade of
water travelled over pale yellow glass, terminating in a recess of deep violet in which
pictures were projected from a kaleidoscope. (Pehnt 1973, p.76.) The presence of the water
served to unify peoples experience of the light into one visual component.
Because this construction was not designed to be a permanent structure it did not need to
meet the heavy physical demands of wear and tear. Thus it is more aesthetically pleasing than
the roman bath building, which in many ways was more functional.The aisled hall of the
baths had a basic rectangular form surrounded by solid stone masonry which gave the
building a sense of permanence. In contrast, the circular form of Tauts skeletal structure
would not have stood by itself: the upper hall was domed with different coloured glass panels
set into reinforced concrete ribs and relied on the stiffening effect of the panels for stability.
The aesthetic function of the arched roof has not changed since the time of the Roman baths
at Avon; in both structures the opening out of the roof provides space in which the mind is set
free to experience the sensual delights of the interior. Yet what differs in Tauts pavilion is the
temporality of the structure. The height creates a paradoxical feeling of temporary
permanence a brief feeling that one is almost liberated from the confines of earthly
structures into the realm of the sky while the presence of the running water beneath reminds
the viewer that they are still on earth.
In a 1928 essay on The Aesthetics of Architecture, Bruno Taut spoke of his love for clean
smoothness (quoted from Ward 2001, p.56.) This philosophy is echoed in design of the
pavilion where the light which is cast down through the glass surrounds hits the lower tier

and is immediately washed away and diffused by the running water. As Strang (2003, p.50)
says, the most constant quality of water is that it is not constant, but is characterised by
transmutability and sensitivity to changes in the environment. Thus it is possible to picture
the experience of the pavilion: the senses being continually stimulated by the changeability
and echo of the water, the shifting light through the glass and its reflection in the water, even
the smell of the humidity all of which are simultaneously and subtly changing according to
the nature of the conditions outside. It is not hard to imagine how a glint of sun might
suddenly have transformed the pavilion into a thousand glimmering pieces. Furthermore, the
seven tiers allow the spectator to control their sensory experience by moving as close and as
far away from the changing light patterns as they desire. Differing levels which induced
different experiences was not a feature of the design in the Roman baths but a parallel can be
drawn between this aspect of the pavilion and the galleried hallway of the baths where the
public could view the spring beneath.
In the comparison between the two case studies so far, the ritual of bathing with its associated
sensory delights becomes replaced by the ritual of aesthetic and sensory appreciation alone
without the water having any practical function whatsoever. It provides an essential focal
point, detracting attention away from what would otherwise be a cold empty space. As Strang
(2003) says of the properties of water: Physically, it is the ultimate fluid, filling any
containing shape and, equally easily, shrinking and disappearing into the earth or evaporating
into the ether. It has an extraordinary ability to metamorphose rapidly into substances with
oppositional qualities, that is, the highly visible, concrete solidity of ice, and the fleeting
dematerialisation of steam. Each state is endlessly reversible, so that this polymorphic range
is always potentially present. (p.49).
It is this changeability and potential of water that enables the pavilion to function as a
dynamic public, yet personal, building. The tiered levels above allow room for private
contemplation in a public space. It is clear that the function of the water differs to that of the
Roman baths, however, the aesthetic experience in both fulfils a maxim quoted by Walter
Gropius that art is none other than the transformation of supramundane thoughts into
objects of sensory perception. (quoted from Pehnt 1973, p.35). In terms of the baths at Avon
and Tauts pavilion, what could have been an ordinary mundane experience the act of
bathing, the observation of an ornamental structure, is transformed by the design of the
building in conjunction with the presence of water and its effect on the senses into something
extraordinary.
The circular form of the interior creates a bubble where the spectator becomes isolated from
the outside world; the changing light and the movement of water creating a sense of
timelessness. As Simon Urwin (2003, pp.125-6) says: every body has around it what might be
called a circle of presence that contributes to its own identification of place. When a body is
in relationship with others, their circles of presence affect each other. When a body is put into
an enclosure or cell its circle of presence is also contained and perhaps moulded.
If this is true then the sensory experience of the individual in the pavilion would be shaped by
the circular presences of the tiers and the water below culminating in a rich and lasting
personal experience. In the roman bath building we see a fine contrast to this experience
where the functional aspect of the water would have caused Urwins circles of presence to
be broken down so that public and private space become one. Indeed Taut himself stared that
he demanded no distinction between public and private buildings. (quoted from Jencks
1985, p.61).

As a final point for the case of the pavilion, it is worth considering the very structure itself
and the space it contains. Its function although not practical like the baths is to provide an
intermediary place between the exposure of the outdoors and the confines of the indoors, a
space out of time. The use of different coloured glass creates a fascinating interplay between
light and water while creating an enclosure without the feeling of being enclosed. This brings
up interesting issues relating to the boundaries of interior and exterior which will be looked at
in greater detail when comparing these studies to Zumthors work later on. The next case
study explores an open air piazza the design of which provides a stark contrast to Tauts
pavilion. The chapter aims to identify the evolving complexity of the relationship between
architectural design, water and the senses moving on now to an example built in 1974.

The Idea Of Universal Design Architecture Essay

There are many misconceptions surrounding the idea of universal design. People often
believe that providing the disabled with signage or a ramp is sufficient and practices the
ideals of universal design. What people must understand is that universal design is about
providing these necessary amenities to the disabled without segregating them from the
norm of society.
1. Equitable use
2. Flexibility in use
3. Simple and intuitive
4. Perceptible information
5. Tolerance for error
6. Low physical effort
7. Size and space for approach and use
Access Living Headquarters
Access Living is an organization that started in the early 1970's and has been committed to
rehabilitation and growth of disabled peoples by the support of disabled peoples. This
company has personal with a multitude of disabilities and unique challenges that they
encounter. In March 5, 2007 LCM Architects lead by partner John H. Catlin, FAIA designed
access living's main headquarters in Chicago with not only a universal focus by as a
sustainable design direction. This 50,000 115 West Chicago Avenue. business footprint for
Access living truly reflects the mission of the company and reinforces their ideals to
empower the options available to differences of others. It has been awarded "the Barrier Free
America Award from Paralyzed Veterans of America; A sustainable design award from AIA;
the Trend Setter Award from Friends of Downtown; LEED Gold Certification; and a Silver
Award from the Association of Licensed Architects".
Design Solutions
"LCM architects started the vision of universal design, by choosing an accessible location"
and considering building approach. The building is no more than two blocks from the local
train's underground station and from the city bus. This close relationship not only encourages
green transportation but it provided for uses that may not have other modes of transportation
and its prime location allows for people from multiple locations to be able to utile this feature
with ease. In addition to the consideration of close proximity, the garage of the building has
designated spaces that allow for electric vehicles to be recharged for use.
As users approach, the building integrates two curb drop offs seamlessly added to allow for
users coming from street level and for wheelchair lifts to have a "direct route to the main
building entrance"[4]. Being in a colder climate of the United States, architect Catlin devised
a solution to deal with iced sidewalks in the winter months by designing a heated concrete
sidewalks and well lit approaches. All of these features lead directly into the entrance of the
building that is separated by two sets of sliding doors that open directly off the sidewalk.
These doors have a wide opening of sixty inches to allow for easy mobility or two
wheelchairs in passing.

Once you enter in to building for access living, its well designed interior lobby space and
furniture selection leaves you no clue that this space is universally designed. LCM architects
and there team of designers took close consideration into their interior choices being
conscience of spacing, materials, colors and configurations so this truly was a universally
accepting space. "Universal design has a close relationship to human factor and ergonomics.
As a process they both attempt to consider the abilities and limitations of users when
developing a product or building an environment.[5]" All of the furniture came from the
Steelcase, so a select piece could be duplicated in several forms to include with arms/without,
adjustable or basic systems that encouraged change as necessary. Using a single manufacturer
line allowed for a wide range of seating choices to read and flow seamlessly. Within this
configuration ample space is giving for wheelchair move ability and integration within a
personal or large group interaction. Multiple chair heights are included for users of all
statures and "clearance below some of the seating is open to allow the user to push up to the
standing position with their leg muscles[6]".
A custom feature within the lobby is the reception desk; "Lehner points out that the reception
area underscores the universal design. ""A person approaching the reception desk in a
wheelchair should have the same ability to use it as a person who doesn't have a disability.
That's the premise behind the entire designno one uses a back door or side door, and no one
uses a ramp. Everybody comes in the same door and uses the same elevators""[8]. Unique to
most reception desk, the primary dimension is at a wheel chaired accessible "counter height
of (29-30" AFF)"[9]. Based on the guided approach to the desk knee and toe space is
carefully designed and provide for. The reception desk does also include a small portion at
the standard height of 42. Much consideration was giving to the reception side of the desk
because this would be the primary and full time user of the millwork. The desk maintains the
counter height and electrical outlets are placed at the ends of the counter opposed to across to
minimize the need for users to strain to reach across counter span. The employee also is
provided with a very accessible approach to their work station and a turning radius within,
allowing for a 360 degree wheelchair turning radius.
Beyond the reception desk, clever inclusions of universal principles are utilized to assist with
user move ability throughout. Two elevators with double entry points allow users to move
quickly in and out without the need of turning within a small confined space. The elevators
are also large enough to support four wheelchairs within. Along with the maximization of
mobility within the elevator Architect Catilin incorporated state of the art emergency use
technology for the deaf and head of hearing and enlarge elevator buttons placed at a universal
accessible height. Each of the floors of the Access Living Company, are color coded so users
can easily identify locality and direction. This color coding process is a wonderful tool to
assist the young child to elderly and people with all timers. This would also eliminate the
frustrations of getting off the elevator on the wrong floor, like so many of us have done. Once
on a floor users, will notice ample floor space as to not to feel constrained by close furniture
configurations and for wheelchair passing.
The high traffic and areas of egress are ingeniously deigned with a floor border that lines the
walls so the visually impaired can easily utilize this tool to maneuver through the floors. To a
user with no sight impairments this simply appears as an aesthetical feature because of how
well it integrated throughout. This feature is a prime example of how universal design
principles do not highlighting the differences of users.

Obstacles
In designing the Access Living headquarter LCM Architects, incurred many obstacles in
creating a space that was not only universal, sustainable but also aesthetically and
functionally useable. With their primary focus on creating a universal space they quickly
learned that "what works for one disability doesn't always work for another,[10]" Lehner
says. As a universal designer you must learn to balance the integration of accommodations so
they are not swayed by a particular user. "That's nowhere more apparent than in the flooring.
LCM discovered through research that carpeting, contrary to popular belief, serves people
with MCS by trapping contaminants that would otherwise remain airborne. It also offers
traction for people using canes. "But carpeting can be difficult to negotiate with a
wheelchair," says Catlin[11]" This is a great lesson to be learned because when people think a
disability they too often only think of wheelchair users. After selecting a fabric that architect
Catlin thought would be perfect for all of the users in the space he quickly had to return to the
drawing board after one employee had an epileptic seizure from the intense patterning of the
flooring. This is one example of the many difficulties faced in this project in designing for the
masses, but Catlin remedies this problem by installing a more muted pattern through the
building while still "ensuring there was still enough contrast on hallway borders to help guide
people with visual impairments[12]".
Conclusion
Although they are a portion of users there are wheel chair bound we must consider and be
aware that there are countless impairments that cause all users to have different needs and
ways in which they utilize a space. Designing a universal space you must have an
understanding of that and remember that you are not designing for outlined user but in turn
everyone becomes your user. It is often very difficult to create and design a workable solution
that all people will deem user friendly, which is why architects and designers seem to steam
away from this principle. Catlin illustrates that not only can design be an aesthetically
pleasing universal space but green principle can also be an applied in a brilliant way.
Works Cited
Access Living. Ed. Geekpak. Acess Living, 2008. Web. 14 Oct. 2009.
Boniface, Russell. "Paralyzed Veterans of America Honors Chicago-based Access
Living for Accessible Design." The News of American's Community of Architects.
AIArchitect, 17 Aug. 2007. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. .

Dong, Hua. Shifting Paradigms in Universal Design. Vol. 4554/2007. Heidelberg:

Springer, 2007. Print.

Goldsmith, Selwyn. Universal Design. Maine: Architectural, 2001. Print.

Meyers, Tiffany. "UNIVERSAL DESIGN IN ACCESS LIVING HQ." Metropolis

Magazine Oct. 2007. Metropolis Magazine, Sept. 09. Web. 23 Oct. 2009. .

Tandem, Byan, ed. "Home Design: Understanding Universal Design." AARP (2008).
AARP. Web. 22 Oct. 2009. .

1. Goldsmith, Selwyn. Universal Design. Maine: Architectural, 2001. Print.

2. Goldsmith

3. Access Living. Ed. Geekpak. Access Living, 2008. Web. 14 Oct. 2009.
4. Access Living
5. Dong, Hua. Shifting Paradigms in Universal Design. Vol. 4554/2007. Heidelberg:
Springer, 2007. Print.
6. Access Living
7. Access Living
8. Boniface, Russell. "Paralyzed Veterans of America Honors Chicago-based Access
Living for Accessible Design." The News of American's Community of Architects.
AIArchitect, 17 Aug. 2007. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. .
9. Access Living
10. Meyers, Tiffany. "UNIVERSAL DESIGN IN ACCESS LIVING HQ." Metropolis
Magazine Oct. 2007. Metropolis Magazine, Sept. 09. Web. 23 Oct. 2009. .
11. Meyers
12. Meyers

Timber frame construction

Introduction
Modern construction comes in many forms, from traditional masonry, to precast concrete, to
steel, and in recent times timber frame construction.

Timber frame and masonry construction are very similar looking buildings. Over the last
thirty years in Ireland the main type used in domestic dwelling was masonry construction
which consists of block inner leaf, cavity, insulation and a block outer leaf, externally
finished normally with a brick or plaster rendered block. Over the last twelve years timber
frame construction has grown to account for nearly forty percent of the market. Timber frame
construction consists of an off site engineered building which arrives to site and the pieces are
assembled to complete the unit. The external finish is similarly to masonry with brick or
plaster rendered block. The reason for chosen this topic is to find why this change occurred.
The purpose of this dissertation is to examine the Irish housing market over the last number
of years, also to find out the reasons for timber frame construction becoming more popular.
Aim
To find out why the trend of building domestic housing in Ireland has changed from masonry
construction to timber frame construction.
Objectives
To investigate the Irish housing market and find reasons for the trend change from
masonry construction to timber frame construction.
To examine the reasons why timber frame construction has grown to the level it has
over masonry construction.

To examine the views of homeowners and property developers towards timber frame
construction.

Literature Review
The primary data will be sourced from RGU database, Internet sites, RGU books and
journals. Relevant Irish government reports and websites will also be looked at to gain an
unbiased view. Also the views of the construction agencies in Ireland will be explored.
Research and methodology
The author plans on doing a comparison of the two construction types in order to achieve
reasons for the shift in trend. The brief comparison case studies will include cost, time, heat
and energy of both types of construction.
Questionnaires
Questionnaires provided the primary research for this dissertation. The author shall do up one
and give it out to relevant homeowners and property developers to gain an insight into their
views. By doing this the author will find out the market potential of timber frame
construction.

Structure of Dissertation
Chapter One
This chapter explains the title of the dissertation, introduces the motivations and gives a
background for the reasons for choosing this topic. The author explains to the reader the aim
and objectives of the dissertation and how they are going to be achieved.
Chapter Two
The literature review will investigate in trend in Irish construction. Current construction
agencies reports will be looked to try and gain an insight to the change in trend. The author
feels that this will achieve the first objection of this dissertation.
Chapter Three
This chapter will investigate the two building options with regard to cost, time, heat and
energy. This will be done by a number of interviews and case studies. Areas looked at will be
construction cost and life cycle costs. Also will include a case study of both types of
construction where U-Values and Building Energy Rating will be achieved and assessed to
gain an insight into why the trend shifted. The author feels that this will achieve the second
objection of this dissertation.
Chapter Four
This chapter the opinions and views of homeowners and property developers towards timber
frame construction and masonry construction are explored by means of a questionnaire. The
author feels this will achieve the third objection of the dissertation.
Chapter Five
In this finally chapter the conclusion provides a brief summary of the finding of the preceding
chapters.
Literature Review
Background
Over 70% of home in the developed world are timber frame homes. 60% of Scottish new
dwelling are timber frame and over all in the United Kingdom timber frame accounts for 15%
of new homes. Ireland is slowly following our neighbours. Over the last ten year Ireland had
been experiencing a construction boom. Housing units been completed in 2000 being 49,812
units growing to 62,686 in 2003, peaking in 2006 with 82,980 unit completed. After 2006 the
housing market in Ireland started to fall, numbers of units being built in 2007 being 71,356
continuing to fall in 2008 as 48,151 units and continuing to fall in 2009. (Central Statistics
Office Ireland 2008)
Many housing estates and apartment blocks had been popping up in every city, town and
village mainly around the computer belt around the capital city of Ireland Dublin. Then
slowly the rest of the country following. In 1992 timber frame construction account for only

5% of the new dwelling market. Since then it has grown to enormous levels to account for
30% of total housing construction nationally (Construction Industry Federation 2009).
Typical these building were constructed by masonry construction, this consisted of a 300mm
cavity wall with block inner leaf, insulation, cavity and a brick/block outer leaf finished with
a plaster render. Over the last seventeen years timber frame construction has shown steady
growth. Timber frame construction consists of an off site engineered building which arrives
to site and the pieces are assembled to complete the unit. The external finish is similarly to
masonry with brick or plaster rendered block. Some industry experts predict that by 2012 it
will account for 50% of the new dwelling market.
"The timber frame industry in Ireland has shown strength and resilience, despite these
difficult economic times. When the upturn comes, timber frame construction will be
presented with numerous opportunities." (Maurice Buckley, CEO, NSAI - National Standards
Authority of Ireland.)
Reasons for this happening?
Energy
In Ireland over the last number of years there has been a turn in attitude regarding the
environment, which has in some part resulted in changes been implemented by the
construction industry with regard to energy conservation. The main topic that has come to the
fore on an Irish domestic level is the conservation of fuel and energy consumption. The
construction industry has been identified as a considerable part of the national energy bill.
Attitudes of developers and homeowner are changing to environmentally friendly buildings.
Due to this timber frame construction has seen a steady growth. Timber frame is renewable
building option, for every tree cut down two more are planted. The cost of turning the raw
product into a building material is conceivably less than traditional methods.
"Timber is the only sustainable renewable commercially viable building material. The
production of concrete produces vast amounts of Carbon Dioxide (C02), which has a negative
impact on the environment and contributes significantly to global warming." (Irish Timber
Frame Manufacturing Association 2009)
Speed
As the construction boom grow so did the need for housing and more importantly fast
housing. One of the main factors for this turn towards timber frame is speed of construction.
The frame of the building can be erected in a number of days which compared to typical
masonry building is incredibly faster. This is due to the timber frame been constructed off site
in a factory and delivered to site as a planned process of assembly. Masonry on the other hand
takes a number of weeks to reach roof level where as timber frame is erected in a number of
days. Even in wet weather work can still continue as a scaffolding system is in place around
the foundation, where as blocks for masonry construction can only be laid in dry weather.
Also with timber frame construction the building is weather proof much faster so internal
works can begin much quicker. Also a lot of the slower work for plumbers and electricians
such as first fixing is much easily done in a timber frame house. "Timber frame has 30%
shorter, more predictable construction time than brick and block" (UK Timber Frame
Association 2009).

In masonry construction the use of wet trades in the build causes extra time needed for drying
out. Because timber frame is a dry form of construction there is no drying out time which is a
saving of a number of weeks. Also because of this there is less lightly a risk of cracking
appearing on walls and ceilings for shrinking which can occur in masonry frequently.
Cost
The cost of a timber frame house is similar to masonry built. Unlike masonry, costs of a
timber frame build can be fixed long before the foundations are poured. This is due to most
timber frame suppliers also fix the structure. So a fix price for a fixed solution. No rain days
for wet trades or no additional costs.
"This ensures that the additional expenses that spiral as a building progress can be
eliminated." (Irish Timber Frame Manufacturing Association 2009).
The number of persons need to fix the structure is lower than a masonry build, also with
regard to time, time is money so the faster the build the cheaper for the developer and
homebuilder. Also the hand over time for a complete dwelling is must faster so this will
benefit developer's cash flow and profitability. Due to the speed of construction on site
security cost or greatly reduced.
Flexibility of Layout
Because timber frames internal walls being construction out of light weigh partition walls the
internal space of a timber frame build is very flexible. Any mistakes in layout of internal
walls is easily rectified, where as masonry internal wall would be particularly more difficult
to correct.
Case Studies
Introduction
To get real reasons for the trend mover towards timber frame construction and to get a true
indication of the cost difference in both timber frame and traditional masonry domestic
construction the author looked at two key areas, construction costs and life cycle costs. In
relation to construction costs the areas of preliminary costs; plant and equipment costs and
site labour costs are looked at in greater detail.
Construction Costs
Preliminary Costs
Every construction project incurs preliminary costs. Preliminary costs are defined as,
"Costs which are directly involved with the overall completion of a construction project"
( Roy Chudley 2002)
These costs include items such as site management, insurance for the project, drivers and
operatives. On larger sites where site cabins, offices, storerooms, toilets and canteens are
required the costs incurred are also referred to as preliminary costs.

For each project there is an allowance set aside for preliminary costs. However in relation to
timber frame construction these costs are included in the overall timber frame package. This
is a result of the majority of the work required for timber frame construction being carried out
off site, which in turn makes the budget costs a lot cheaper than traditional masonry. Derek
Moore a director with Timberline building contractors Ltd Dublin states,
"by pre-manufacturing the timber frame off-site, houses are constructed more cost
effectively". (Pick a Pro 2009)
To back up this point the Irish Timber frame manufactures association states "this method of
construction is not cheaper particularly if the builder hasn't thought his practices through but
because factory fabrication means much greater predictability, better controls and of course, a
faster pace" (Irish Timber Frame Manufacturing Association 2009).
This is not the case for its traditional masonry counterpart as preliminary costs are required as
a separate budget, this is due to the fact that all of the work required for traditional masonry is
carried out on site. A majority of the preliminary budget for the traditional masonry method
includes hire of plant and provision for skips and concrete silos on site etc. Another factor to
be taken into consideration is the time period taken to construct a timber frame house, which
is significantly lower than that of traditional masonry counterpart. Costs such as site
supervision and the need for engineers and the like on site are greatly reduced.
Plant and Equipment Costs
Plant and equipment costs should be taken in to consideration when dealing with construction
costs. Every project requires certain types of equipment and plant to carry out work to a
conclusion. According to Colm Kilroy a quantity surveyor with Michael Higgins and
associates in Galway, "plant and equipment costs are a major part of all construction projects,
the utilization of such equipment is vital as a lot of money can be wasted due to bad
management and planning on site". He continued to say "if plant is required on site for a
certain job it is vital that the site is ready for that equipment as once it arrives on site it has to
be paid for." (Colm Kilroy 2009)
The weather can also plays a part in plant and equipment costs, adverse weather conditions
can lead to a lot of equipment being left idle while the cost for having it on the site is still
being charged. Obviously the weather conditions cannot be controlled by the project team but
in periods of forecasted inclement weather the ordering of plant and materials should be
avoided if possible.
Site Labour Costs
This area of site labour costs greatly differs with both methods of construction. A lot of the
factors in relation to cost for the timber frame method of construction are all inclusive of the
over timber frame package, the majority of the work to be carried out by specialised labour is
completed in the factory and once the timber frame unit leaves for the site their work is
finished.
This in turn reduces any call back costs, to complement this, the Irish timber frame
manufactures association states that,

"There are lower call back costs; any problems encountered can be eliminated immediately
by the timber frame specialists before leaving the factory." (Irish Timber Frame
Manufacturing Association 2009)
The cost for the labour to rectify these problems is still inclusive of the timber frame package.
Traditional masonry construction is in comparison carried out differently with all the
construction work associated with traditional masonry been carried out on site and with each
individual trade requiring labour to carry out the work.
Cost Case Study
The author compiled a cost comparison from a construction contractor's point of view for the
development of a timber frame and masonry domestic dwelling. The house plans used to
carry out this comparison were based on a single house within a development of five similar
houses, only the major elements of the structures were included in the pricing. for the
comparison were obtained from Barry Doyle a quantity surveyor with a Co Carlow company
and John O Connell a construction contractor in Co Galway.
The timber frame house is more expensive to construct than its masonry counterpart. There is
a cost difference of approximately 9,000 between both methods to construct a single house
taking the main structural elements in to consideration. For the development consisting of
five houses where this house is located the total price difference in the construction of the
five houses using both methods of construction can be up to 45,000 to 50,000. The
following information shows the reasoning behind the price differences for the important
elements of the construction.
Timber frame kit
This element looks to be very expensive but the majority of materials needed to complete the
timber frame house including the labour needed for the construction are included.
Concrete raft foundation
The price of the raft foundation differs as there is less steel required in the raft for the timber
frame house in comparison to the masonry built house, this leads to savings for both the
labour and materials.
Block work
The difference in the price of the block work is due to the inner leaf and the internal walls of
the timber frame house been constructed of timber.
Roof
The timber frame kit incorporates a majority of the roof in the over all package which leads is
a massive price difference from the standard roof for the masonry dwelling.

Insulation
Due to the requirement for more insulation in the timber frame house there is a difference in
price over its masonry counterpart.
Slabbing
As with the insulation due to the amount of timber stud internal partitions and timber inner
leaf walls the timber frame dwelling requires more plaster board than the masonry method
which increases both the amount of material and labour.
Plastering
The plastering element differs solely because of the reduced quantity of scratch coat required
in the timber frame house.
Carpentry
The price difference in relation to carpentry is a result of a lot of the timber work coming pre
fabricated as part of the timber frame kit, an example being the doors coming pre hung with
ironmongery fitted and architrave already attached.
Main contractors Profit
The main contractors profit has been calculated on the standard percentage being 5%.
Life Cycle Costs
Introduction
Life cycle costs are commonly interpreted as,"The operating costs of buildings over the
forecast useful life attributed to them" (Bruceshaw 2009)
These costs include initial capital costs, occupation costs and operating costs. In relation to
the building industry and in particular to the traditional masonry and timber frame methods of
construction, life cycle costs are essential in deciding which is the overall cost effective
method of construction is. In this chapter the author discusses areas such as the running costs
and other costs that are involved with both forms of construction.
Design Differences and Alterations
From an aesthetic point of view timber frame and traditional masonry constructed dwellings
when constructed look very similar, however timber frame houses,
"Allow for more versatile designs than block built houses" (Pick a Pro 2009)
The question is once the house is constructed how easy is it to carry out modifications to the
design. In relation to these alterations Kingspan Century state,

"Due to the fact the inner leaf of your timber frame house is constructed of solid wood and
plasterboard, and not concrete blocks and plaster, extensions and alterations generally have
significantly reduced impact on the existing building". (Kingspan Century 2007)
To further this statement MBS Timber frame Ltd state,
"Because the interior of a timber frame house is made of wooden panels and plasterboard,
alterations and extensions will not involve the mess and severe disruption of knocking down
solid block walls, and all the other trials and tribulations that accompany this type of work".
(MBC Timber Frame 2009)
Alternatively the block work internal leaf of a masonry house has distinct advantages over is
timber frame counterpart. Tasks such as fixing a shelf or curtain rail can be a tricky with the
timber frame method,
"There is no problem doing this in a masonry build home as all the walls are capable of
holding shelves, curtain rails etc. it would be a simple matter of drilling the holes in the
correct place and screwing your shelf into place" (Irish Concrete Federation 2009).
In comparison, with a timber frame house, according to John Meehan a carpenter with a Co
Galway Company,
"If you are installing a new kitchen or television unit, you may find that there are no grounds
in the wall where you need a fixing. If in this situation if your fixing is put in place without
finding a stud, the unit is sure to fall down under pressure". (David Treacy 2009)
Property Market and Selling Value
Influencing factors in relation to domestic construction include resale value and ease of sale.
The traditional masonry constructed process has built up a reputation of been a good seller
and a favourite with the Irish public, Galway auctioneer John Gilmore states,
"Block built houses are easier to sell as people generally go for the trusted method, a lot of
people inquiring about timber frame houses are wary and are not easily convinced as to its
benefits" (Liam Gordon 2009).
The view of an Irish timber frame company is that,
"Auctioneers and estate agents are generally of the opinion that not only is timber frame not
an obstacle in selling a home, but on the contrary, is becoming more and more a major selling
point. The energy efficiency of timber frame houses is becoming an increasingly valued
characteristic". (Kingspan Century 2008)
To reiterate this,
"For mortgage purposes and insurance, most lenders and insurers rank timber frame equally
with block work. As far as resale value is concerned, there appears to be no difference at all
between the two systems. However some individuals have their own preferences, built up
from their own experience or things they have heard about either system". (Homebuilding
and Renovating Magazine 2005)

Running Costs
The timber frame method of domestic construction encounters large savings over its
traditional masonry counterpart. These savings result from the timber frame house having an
allowance for insulation on both the external and internal walls; this differs considerably
from the traditional masonry method where in most cases only the external walls contain
insulation.
"Because timber frame structures are extremely well insulated and have less mass than more
traditional forms of construction, significant savings can be made in heating costs".
(Homebuilding and Renovating Magazine 2005)
A leading Irish timber frame company states,
"Savings of between 30% and 40% on heating bills are fairly typical". (Devsan Timber Frame
Homes 2009)
In relation to further savings in the future with timber frame,
"It is estimated that the heating cost of a timber frame home can be 30% lower than that of a
masonry dwelling, and the rapid rise in energy costs these costs look set to increase". Sunday
Business Post Newspaper 2007)
In conclusion the savings to be made with the timber frame method of domestic construction
in relation to heating and energy use are extensive over its masonry counterpart.
Time of Construction
Introduction
From a time to construct perspective the length of time it takes to build and finish both forms
of construction differs. The construction of a traditional masonry dwelling has a longer time
programme than its timber frame counterpart. The main factors contributing to the difference
in construction times include.
Programme of works
The programme of works for both methods has a time difference of approximately seven
weeks from foundation stage to decorating and moving in stage. Derek Moore of Timberline
building contractors states,
"In terms of build speed, timber frame can deliver a significant 30% reduction on traditional
construction times, which affect cash flow and reduces local disturbance". (Pick a Pro 2009)
The view of another Irish timber frame supplier is the construction time of both methods of
construction is even larger depending on the building,
"Construction time is cut by almost 40% as your timber frame structure is erected on site
within days depending on size and complexity of building". (Clark Group 2008)

Building Finishes
During the stage whereby the timber frame unit is erected the internal first fixing work can
commence. This work can proceed inside the house as the masonry skin is being built, in
comparison no internal work can commence on the masonry house while the block work
element is being constructed. The long drying out period associated with traditional masonry
construction is also a disadvantage in comparison to the timber frame method.
"Apart from the obvious labour saving, timber frame doesn't need any drying-out time, unlike
a standard masonry construction, which needs up to 1,500 gallons of water to evaporate
before it is dry". (Sunday Tribune 2001)
To reiterate this a leading Irish timber frame supplier states,
"Timber frame aids internal finishes, all walls are straight and plumb, corners are square
and true. With timber frame there are less of the "wet" trades, plasterboard needs only to be
skimmed and paint, decorative materials and floor coverings can be applied sooner to dried
surfaces". (Castle Timber Frame Homes 2009)
Heat Loss in Buildings
Introduction
For the purpose of this dissertation the author compared the U Value of the external walls of
both a timber frame and masonry constructed dwelling, the author also decided to obtain the
Building Energy Rating (BER) for both methods of construction so as to make an accurate
comparison. Both the U Value calculation and the Building Energy Rating are based on the
house plans. With the expertise of Michael Sweeney of Sweeney Energy the U Value and
BER calculations were compiled and the results are as follows.
U-Value Calculation
A U-value is the term given to the measure of heat loss through sections of a building. It
measures the rate that heat transmits through a component or structure when there is a
difference in air temperature at both sides.
"U Values are expressed in Watts per metre Kelvin which is the rate of heat transfer in watts
through 1m2 of the structure for one unit of temperature difference between the air on the two
sides of the structure". (Roy Chudley 2002)
U-Value Terms
The following are terms associated with the calculation of the U-Value.
Thermal Conductivity
"It is the measure of a materials ability to transmit heat and is expressed as the energy flow
in watts per square metre of surface area". (Roy Chudley 2002)

Thermal Resistance
"This is symbolized by the letter R, as representative of a materials thermal resistance
achieved by dividing its thickness in metres by its thermal conductivity". (Roy Chudley 2002)
Timber Frame U-Value Calculation
The above calculations show that a traditional masonry external cavity wall has a U-Value of
0.35 W/m2K in comparison to the timber frame outer wall, which has a U-Value of 0.25
W/m2K. The findings for this particular calculation show that the timber frame domestic
construction has a better U-Value than its masonry constructed counterpart.
Building Energy Rating (BER) Calculation
The author decided to compare the Building Energy Rating of both methods of construction.
To achieve this the author availed of the expertise of a qualified BAR assessor who calculated
both BER values using the same house plans as used for the U Value Calculations. For the
purpose of the reader the author explains some of the terms associated in the Building energy
rating procedure.
Building Energy Rating Terms
The procedure is based on calculating the energy balance for a dwelling,
"this is the energy required by the dwelling plus any losses, then less the energy gains this is
equal to the energy delivered in to the dwelling" (Cheveron Training 2009)
Delivered Energy, expressed as kWh/year. This corresponds to the energy consumption that
would normally appear on the energy bills of the dwelling for the assumed standardisation
occupancy and end users considered. (Cheveron Training 2009)
Primary Energy, expressed as kWh/year. This includes delivered energy, plus an allowance
for energy "overhead" incurred in extracting, processing and transporting a fuel or other
energy carrier to the dwelling. For example, in the case of electricity it takes account of
generation efficiency at power stations. (Cheveron Training 2009)
The results show that both timber frame and traditional masonry domestic construction have
an energy rating of B2 for this house. The B2 rating is acceptable for a building, which
incorporates a natural ventilation design.
The primary energy value for the timber frame method of construction is lower than it's
masonry counterpart and indicates that the overhead incurred in extracting, processing and
transporting of energy to the dwelling is lower for timber frame method.
The comparison of the Co2 emissions results in the timber frame method having lower
emissions output and as previously discussed the lower the Co2 emission the better it is for
the environment.

Finally the timber frame method had a lower delivered energy rating. This shows that the
energy consumption on the energy bills of the dwelling are again lower than its masonry
counterpart.
Developers views regarding the change from masonry to timber frame:
To achieve a true indication on the views of the construction industry in regard to both
methods of construction and why the trend has moved towards timber frame it was necessary
to obtain the views of developers who actually carry out the building works.
As part of the author research, many construction agencies were contacted. Philip Mahoney
of timber frame manufactures association was contacted and helped with the author's
questions.
Philip Mahoney of the Timber Frame Manufacturing Association said when asked why the
trend has moved from masonry to timber frame.
"From a developers point of view speed of construction was very important, because a timber
frame house can be up and roofed in a matter of days and ready for the follow on trades to
move in. for the developer this was a great advantage as they were in and out much quicker
and therefore turn cash over.
Timber frame would have also have got popular with the self build sector because of the fact
that a) quite an education process was carried out by the association and its members, b) the
green card also began to come into play as well as timber frame is seen as environmentally
friendly which the industry has been promoting."
Tom McHugh, Director of Kilcloghans Ltd Galway who have been prominent traditional
masonry builders for a number of years said in regards to ease of build "we are masonry
builders and we build timber frame, we find that it is especially simple to build the timber
frame method" he went on to say in relation to construction costs "timber frame is as
economical to build as traditional masonry" regarding construction costs in relation to the
downturn in the construction industry he stated "yes the construction cost for both methods
had dropped but both methods still work out in and around the same price". He also stated
that they found the main advantages of timber frame to be "a drier form of
construction as well as the obvious advantages of speed to build and economical to run".
From a selling point of view he found timber frame, "easier for the reason that they are more
economical in terms of energy use".
Francis Geraghty Director of Frame to finish building contractors Co Galway stated in terms
of ease of construction, "the timber frame method depends largely on the type of house the
client wants to build as well as the quality of site preparation before the timber frame
building reaches the site". He sees the main advantages of the timber frame method for him
are "the U-Values that can be achieved" and also "the whole timber frame structure is up and
ready for internal work in a matter of days".
Colm Kilroy a Quantity Surveyor with Michael Higgins and Associates Galway said "from a
cost of materials point of view certain materials have dropped in price, but the real drop in
price has come from the tradesmen themselves more so for traditional masonry rather than

the timber frame method. With such competition for work cost of labour has decreased
rapidly". He went on to say, "this drop in labour costs could be a key to the choice of the
public in the coming years with traditional masonry getting so cheap to build".
John O' Connell, a builder, based in Co. Galway stated that he sees the main disadvantages of
Timber Frame construction as "the inclement weather conditions in this country, have people
concerned that timber may rot over time. People also feel more secure with bricks and
mortar".
Sean O Donnell a foreman with a building contractor in Co Galway who specialises with
both forms of construction sees the main advantages of timber frame over traditional masonry
in relation to cost to be "less labour intensive, less wastage of materials on site, and when
lived in less cost in running". In relation to time to construct he said, "less time lost due to
adverse weather, you get to see the finished product quicker and easier and timber frame
leads to quicker installation of electrical wiring". Regarding insulation he states, "with a
timber frame house you are closer to the living area and so not heating the outside wall
before reaching insulation value, it takes very little to heat up house and the quality of
insulation is key to better acoustic performance".
Questionnaire Results
Introduction
To get a true and realistic view on both methods of domestic construction the author
decided to obtain the views of the residents who live in timber frame homes. To achieve this,
a questionnaire was compiled and distributed around the Galway area. A copy of the
questionnaire is included in the appendix at the end of the dissertation and the results are as
follows.
As can be seen from the pie chart emphatically shows that 100% of the surveyed residents
notice the timber frame method of construction to be cheaper to heat than its traditional
masonry counterpart. The comments received included,
"Traditional block was more expensive; I used solid fuel range with a back boiler and oil
central heating. It was necessary to have heat constantly from back boiler toped up by oil, in
comparison the oil heating in the timber frame runs for 4 hours per day from November until
March to the downstairs radiators only. We have 2 open fires that we never use as it would be
too hot. Our oil bill is reduced by 2/3 and we don't require solid fuel".
A further comment stated,
"Timber frame is cheaper as not as cold during the day so no need for much heat during the
winter months"
clearly shows that the residents find their timber frame dwellings to be warmer than the
traditional masonry counterpart with 84% finding it a lot warmer and 14% of residents stating
it to be slightly warmer

shows how well people rate the acoustic performance of their timber frame house in relation
to external noises. 55% of the residents find there to be no noise while 45% of the residents
find there to be a little noise. One of the residents stated,
"The only noise to be heard is that of the rain water running to the gully".
A further resident stated,
"External noises are not an issue, but my house is located on a bit of an elevated site and
on a very windy day the wind can be an issue".
Other examples of external noises to be heard included traffic from a nearby main road and
dogs barking, but no additional noises than would also be heard in a traditional masonry
dwelling.
shows what the resident's thoughts are on the acoustic performance of their dwellings in
relation to upstairs noise. 22% of the residents state that there is a lot of noise to be heard
from floor to floor, a majority of the noise is a result of poor sound insulation being used.
One resident stated,
"Floor sound proofing between floors is a problem, we did not take this in to account during
construction".
44% of the resident's state there is a little noise to be heard from upstairs with movement on
floors and doors closing being the main contributors. Finally 34% of the residents state there
is no noise to be heard, a number of them said that during construction stage they had the
builders put in extra sound proofing between floors, which acted most beneficially in cutting
down the noise. Other residents who found there to be no upstairs noise lived alone and in a
result had no upstairs movement while in the house.