Page 2 of 3

Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2017 10:32 am
by Roderick Grant
True, it's hard to find much to praise in this mess. Even the original design, had it been executed with extreme care, was a bit blocky and un-church-like. Little wonder why it has never garnered any attention.

Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2017 1:22 pm
by DRN
Even the original design, had it been executed with extreme care, was a bit blocky and un-church-like.
I agree. The church looks to me like a derivation of Wright's "New Theater" for Woodstock, NY from the late '20's.

Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2017 5:31 pm
by SDR
The New Theater, Woodstock, NY, 1931 (project).



Image


Image


Image


Image


Image


© 2009 by TASCHEN GmbH and by the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation

Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 10:17 am
by DavidC

Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:18 am
by DRN
Bringing this thread forward to post-outage status. Keywords: Community Christian Church , Kansas City.

Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2019 12:52 pm
by Jeff Myers
From In The Nature Of The Materials circa 1941

Image
Image

Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2019 4:37 pm
by SDR
The 1940 church in Kansas City bears a resemblance, in building system or at least in material palette---and in the resulting exterior expression---to the 1955 Kalita Humphreys theater in Dallas ?

S

Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2019 4:45 pm
by SDR
Well, I have to alter that statement; the church was to have been Gunite sprayed over a paper-backed steel wire mesh on steel-framed walls. (We have a similar material, on wood studs, in parts of my 1928 city apartment building.)

The Dallas Theater Center, on the other hand, is a concrete building, according to Storrer ...

S

Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:00 am
by DRN
The Guggenheim was constructed with spray applied concrete as well, shot from the structure's interior into/against plywood forms and later troweled or plastered smooth on the interior face.

The gunite used at the Guggenheim is a dry mix in which water is introduced at the nozzle which allows more time to work the concrete and for work to start and stop without problems of cold joints...(as opposed to shotcrete which is an already wet mix sprayed into or onto formwork).

https://www.guggenheim.org/blogs/checkl ... guggenheim

A pic of Wright at the site with raw concrete being painted:
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 132535844/

and

https://www.archdaily.com/874207/the-58 ... seum-photo

Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:39 am
by SDR
I wonder where in the building these forms would have been employed:

Image

And, what would have been the form surface applied to these ribs; the shape is a compound curve, so plywood would be out of the question ...

S

Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 11:37 am
by DRN
Good question...
I had figured they were some element in the lower level auditorium that I have never been inside. Steiner has a set of construction photos of the lower level, but I'm not seeing a direct match:
http://www.steinerag.com/flw/Books/GuggConst57.htm

Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:10 pm
by SDR
Thanks. That ramp and lower-level arcade is news to me, entirely.

Come to that, what could the completed narrow curved forms in the first photo be for ...

S

Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:33 am
by loo tee
The original color of the Community Church was pink. After a rainfall, the building looked like it had a skin disease, all splotchy. Eventually, a painting contractor named Jerome Friedson was hired to paint the building white, and he received angry protests from Wright for doing so.
The idea of the church was aborted in the sense that the entire south side--the vast parking terraces and outdoor chapel--were never built. The church was meant to be a kind of drive-in theater during nicer weather, just as the Marin County buildings border on the idea of a suburban shopping mall.
Neither, obviously, was anywhere close to Wright at his best.

Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2019 10:45 am
by Jeff Myers
Wright- ambitious genius who, at times, was stifled by incompetent contractors who failed to see or execute his vision properly.

The community church was not a failure of a Wright design, rather it is a failure of the clients budget, city, and contractor. It still is a gem but Wright was none to pleased with it because the work of art it was to be was tampered by the one who oversaw it being built.

Look to the Price Tower, Beth Shalom, Guggenheim, Ann Pfeiffer chapel as examples of great contractor/architect relationship.
The Price Tower had Haskell Culwell as the contractor, he also contracted on Beth Shalom too. Just thought to throw that note in.

These are just my opinions. I have researched some of Wright’s designs and developed this opinion based on what I have seen scratched in on the plans.

Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2019 11:19 am
by SDR
Couldn't find a photo of the church in pink---so here it is. Too bright, I'm sure; I like the pink/brown shadows.


Image