Austin Home / Aamodt / Plumb Architects

first_img Fabricator:BensonwoodCity:AustinCountry:United StatesMore SpecsLess SpecsSave this picture!© Casey DunnRecommended ProductsWoodAccoyaAccoya® Cladding, Siding & FacadesWoodBlumer LehmannFree Form Structures for Wood ProjectsWoodEGGERLaminatesWoodSculptformTimber Click-on BattensText description provided by the architects. Aamodt / Plumb was commissioned to design a home for a young family on a beautiful site on Lake Austin with only one catch: an incredibly compressed 12-month schedule. “12 months is extremely fast!” notes Aamodt. “Twelve months made us realize that we had to think very differently about how to do this project. What we did was to redesign the process of building a house.”Save this picture!© Casey DunnThe architects built a complete Building Information Model (BIM) of the home in Revit before any construction happened. Then, to meet the tight schedule the young architects employed fast-tracking techniques typically used on large-scale projects and adapted them to the residential context where tolerances are much more demanding. They worked with Bensonwood, a high-tech sustainable timber company, to manufacture panelized sections of the house in their factory off-site. At the same time, all of the site-work and foundation work was performed on-site by Austin’s high-performance builder Risinger Homes. This significantly reduced the amount of time to construct the building envelope. Matt Risinger of Risinger homes commented: “We were able to frame the house in just two weeks. That’s pretty incredible for a 6,000 square foot custom home.” The factory fabrication also meant that the envelope of the house fit together so well that the house was approaching passive energy standards with no additional measures. The architects were left with an air-tight envelope and fully complete site-work in the same amount of time that a normal house might have had only the site-work or foundations completed.Save this picture!Floor PlanThe house itself has an airy, relaxed feel that matches perfectly with the relaxed Austin vibe. Spaces blend with one another and views outside and to the lake beyond bring nature into the house. The house is divided into two wings: a private wing for the family to sleep and work in, and a public wing for dining, entertaining, and recreation. The split massing of the house allowed the architects to preserve all of the trees on the site and the house nestles around a mature live oak tree which adds to a sense of privacy and connection to nature.Save this picture!© Casey DunnOn the exterior of the house, the high performance timber panels are clad in Shou Sugi Ban charred Cyprus, an ancient Japanese method of preserving wood by charring and cooling the wood. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPhyfP-qMM4 The black finish of the charred Cyprus is offset by a lightweight white steel roof that efficiently reflects the rays of the Texas sun away from the house keeping it cool during the summer months.Save this picture!Floor PlanThe architects, their builder, and fabricator deployed a novel use of prefabrication technology, and interior planning and organization, and traditional techniques to execute a high-end custom home that feels comfortable and effortless in a record amount of time.Save this picture!© Casey DunnProject gallerySee allShow lessThe New New York Skyline (Sunlight Not Included)Architecture NewsPeter Zumthor: “There’s Nothing I’m Not Interested In”Videos Share “COPY” Houses United States “COPY” Save this picture!© Casey Dunn+ 15 Share CopyHouses•Austin, United States Year:  ArchDaily Austin Home / Aamodt / Plumb ArchitectsSave this projectSaveAustin Home / Aamodt / Plumb Architects Projects Area:  6000 ft² Area:  6000 ft² Year Completion year of this architecture project Austin Home / Aamodt / Plumb Architectscenter_img Year:  Risinger Homes Architects: Aamodt / Plumb Architects Area Area of this architecture project photographs:  Casey DunnPhotographs:  Casey Dunn 2014 Builder: ShareFacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappMailOrhttps://www.archdaily.com/777901/austin-home-aamodt-plumb-architects Clipboard ShareFacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappMailOrhttps://www.archdaily.com/777901/austin-home-aamodt-plumb-architects Clipboard Photographs 2014 CopyAbout this officeAamodt / Plumb ArchitectsOfficeFollowProductWood#TagsProjectsBuilt ProjectsSelected ProjectsResidential ArchitectureHousesAustinUnited StatesPublished on November 30, 2015Cite: “Austin Home / Aamodt / Plumb Architects” 30 Nov 2015. ArchDaily. Accessed 11 Jun 2021. ISSN 0719-8884Read commentsBrowse the CatalogLouvers / ShuttersTechnowoodSunshade SystemsCompositesMitrexPhotovoltaic Solar Cladding – BIPV CladdingMetal PanelsAurubisCopper Alloy: Nordic BronzeBathroomsGeberitBathroom Series – ONESkylightsLAMILUXGlass Skylight F100 CircularMetal PanelsTrimoQbiss One in Equinix Data CentreSignage / Display SystemsGoppionDisplay Case – Q-ClassAluminium CompositesAmerican MetalcraftAluminum Panels – Decorative Fencing for BridgesPanels / Prefabricated AssembliesULMA Architectural SolutionsWater Facade PanelDoorsLinvisibileLinvisibile Concealed Sliding Door | MareaWall / Ceiling LightsiGuzziniExterior Light – WalkyWoodPlycoWood Boards – Birch LaserplyMore products »Read commentsSave世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?是否翻译成中文现有为你所在地区特制的网站?想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?Take me there »✖You’ve started following your first account!Did you know?You’ll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my streamlast_img read more

“FIRs Filed Basis Toxic Social Media Posts Against Devgan”: Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra Tells SC

first_imgTop Stories”FIRs Filed Basis Toxic Social Media Posts Against Devgan”: Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra Tells SC Sanya Talwar24 Sep 2020 5:56 AMShare This – xJournalist Amish Devgan’s Counsel, Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra submitted before the Supreme Court today that offences alleged against Devgan are not made out and thus the FIR’s deserve to be quashed.As many as 7 FIRs have been filed in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra & Telangana against Devgan on the basis of derogatory remarks that he made against Sufi…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginJournalist Amish Devgan’s Counsel, Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra submitted before the Supreme Court today that offences alleged against Devgan are not made out and thus the FIR’s deserve to be quashed.As many as 7 FIRs have been filed in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra & Telangana against Devgan on the basis of derogatory remarks that he made against Sufi Saint Moinnuddin Chisti on his prime time show, telecast on June 15.Luthra told a bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar & Sanjiv Khanna that the FIRs stipulate offences under Sections 153A, 153G, 295A, 298, 5050(2) of IPC & 66(f) of the Information Technology Act against Devgan but none of the FIRs & their contents justify their requisite ingredients in terms of the Indian Penal Code.First, Luthra read out transcripts from the show and submitted that the statements made by Devgan for the Sufi Saint were inadvertently made and that he had issued public apology for the same.”He is himself a follower of the Sufi Saint and visits the Ajmer Shareef Dargah regularly,” said Luthra, adding that a social media post stating his apology was put out on June 17 at 11.53 PM.While elaborating that there was no correlation between tendering apology and filing of FIR, Luthra said that the apology was made at 11.53 PM on June 17 while the first FIR was registered 18 minutes later.Luthra’s skeletal legal arguments centered around the following:1) The first test being, are any of the ingredients of the offences made out? A statement made without intent cannot be considered to be a criminal offence u/s 153A,295A, 505 of IPC & 66 of IT Act.2) Alternatively…assuming thereto, is it not a case made under Section 95 and liable to be quashed?3) One cannot have alternative FIRs arising out the same alleged offence, doing so points to abuse of power.4) Also, assuming though not accepting that an FIR could lie, the jurisdiction cannot be beyond Noida where the broadcast was made, Devgan cannot be dragged to any and every corner of the country.Luthra argued that the basis of filing an FIR basis against Devgan stemmed from what was learnt by complainant on social media. “What is said on social media is often very toxic and if you read something toxic, does not mean the original content was. This man did not even watch the show and he states in the FIR itself that he got the information about Devgan’s derogatory statements from social media” he added.While one FIR did state that Devgan had the intention to insult the Sufi Saint, which he did deliberately (by using the word “Lootera” for Khwaja Moinnuddin Chisti on his show), Luthra argued that intention in no way makes out an offence. Then, the Senior Counsel argued that that a comment against a religious figure would not attract an offence under 295A IPC.There is absence of all ingredients made out against Devgan, under Section 153A, 295A or 505(2) of the IPC.”I would submit, how can the act fall within 505(2)? The mere usage of the word intent or deliberate in the FIR will not bring offences within the corners of these sections under IPC against,” said Luthra.Further, he contended that section 66(f) of the Information Technology act would also not be attracted as it stipulated ingredients of “Cyber Terrorism”.The bench is expected to hear arguments tomorrow throughout the day from 10.30 AM.Background:While hosting a debate on June 15 on PIL’s regarding the Place of Worship Special Provision Act on his show ‘Aar Par’, Amish had called Khwaja Moinuddin Chisthi, better known as Khwaja Ghreeb Nawaz, an “attacker” and “looter”.Following that, several police complaints and FIRs were registered against the anchor across the country.Devgan’s petition filed through Advocate Vivek Jain seeks quashing of the FIRs which have invoked sections 295A (Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs), ‪153A‬ (Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc, and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony), 505 (Statements conducing to public mischief) and 34 (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).Devgan had also profusely apologised for referring to the Sufi Saint as a “lootera” and called it an “inadvertent error”.His tweet of apology read:”In 1 of my debates,I inadvertently referred to ‘Khilji’ as Chishti. I sincerely apologise for this grave error and the anguish it may hv caused to followers of the Sufi saint Moinuddin Chishti, whom I revere. I have in the past sought blessings at his dargah. I regret this error”.On July 8, the top court had directed a stay on an investigation and coercive action against journalist Amish Devgan.Subscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Storylast_img read more