Page 2 of 4

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2018 8:23 pm
by SDR
Well, that makes at least as much sense as any other reason.

It raises the question, however, of "what are the differences between the original and the 'inspired' version," in each case. Houses with differences in
dimension, proportion, fenestration, etc, cannot feel identical, though both might be pleasant and even delightful to be in . . .

SDR

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2018 8:35 pm
by SDR
Image. . . .Image

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2018 11:56 am
by DRN
The Willoughby, based on the Penfield house, has significant plan changes:

-master bedroom is on the first floor...no beds on first floor of original
-the fireplace has been pulled toward the living room such that it is at the edge of the second floor, rather than its middle...high ceiling at fireplace not as cozy
-galley kitchen on the original is widened to be the full width of the house..it is now part of the entry sequence

There are other changes. The Lindal house is reminiscent, but not a copy by any means, and is a very good house on its own terms. To a lay person it may be just the same, but I believe it would be different experientially in many respects.

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2018 12:47 pm
by Roderick Grant
The huge, open kitchen is an oddity to me. A galley kitchen, where a lone cook can get the work done without having to stop for a glass of pinot noir and a chat with guests, seems more efficient. But I suppose in the age of Lidia Bastianich and Martha Stewart, cooking has become a communal event. I had an apartment with a kitchen where I could sit at the table, reach into the 'fridge and handle the cooktop all without getting up. But I had to clean up in the bathroom.

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2018 4:24 pm
by SDR
The night-time image of the Gordon-like house shows several novel features, but further snooping, of images linked at the bottom of the page, reveals a different version of the design that seems much closer to the Gordon opus.

https://lindal.com/blog/home_style/silverton/

I haven't compared plans on any of these designs, yet. The open kitchen is a post-war development, for the most part -- and how much "post" I couldn't say, though my impression is 'seventies or later . . . ?

SDR

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2018 6:38 pm
by BBuck

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:05 pm
by SDR
Reading the customer reviews is a downer, but it should be good for something: reminders to potential customers of the ways in which they could screw
up their own experience of building a home. Forewarned is forearmed ?

"Questions to ask," would be another way to frame that point. One imagines that many successful transactions have taken place over the course of the
company's history -- a great majority of them, indeed, if the longevity of the firm is any evidence. Still, some interesting-if-true items or issues were raised.

I had a friend who bought a "Yankee Barn Home" kit from an outfit in New England, and erected it on her property in the town of Sonoma, out here. She
suffered some disappointments, stemming in large part from her failure to take the company's advice in the matter of construction supervision, and in
selecting an inexperienced and over-committed builder.

I'm recalling what I read in the Erdman Prefab literature that was posted here not long ago, in the (informal) list of supplied parts that curiously omitted
mention of roof sheathing material . . .

SDR

Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2018 11:11 am
by Roderick Grant
The Silverton Model is interesting, but oddly, the guest suite has a larger bath and more closet space than the master bedroom.

Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2018 6:21 pm
by SDR
Lindal "Silverton" plans:
Image
© 2018 by Lindal Cedar Homes


As the guest suite might be expected to be on the ground floor, rather than at the end of the second-floor bedroom row, perhaps this is just a case
of mis-labeling, Roderick ? In any event, the actual use of the house is certainly at the option of the owner . . .

(Pfeiffer and Storrer remind us that the Gordon plan is a version of Schwartz; Pfeiffer relates Schwartz, in turn, to Jester.)


Rather than judging this group of designs for what they aren't, perhaps the progressive option would be to appraise them for what they are. Two
designers well placed, it would seem, to interpret Wright (or at the very worse, knock him off), are present at the creation, here. The plans seem
sound from several points of view, and if they aren't literal interpretations of Wright's work, I would say that's what we've been expecting -- and in
some cases recommending -- all along ?

SDR

Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2018 10:24 pm
by clydethecat
I'd love to see photos instead of renderings, if there are ever any built examples.

I'm not sure what the market is for a 2600 sq ft, million dollar house...

Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2018 10:29 pm
by SDR
On this page we find a tie-in between Lindal and the new digital record of T West . . .

https://lindal.com/blog/lis-promotion/

Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2018 10:35 pm
by SDR
Here, under "Photo Gallery," we have a number of photographs, mixed in with digital images:

https://lindal.com/image-search/

No Wright-likes, yet . . .



On this page we find a tie-in between Lindal and the new digital record of T West . . .

https://lindal.com/blog/lis-promotion/

SDR

Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2018 9:55 am
by jay
Rather than judging this group of designs for what they aren't, perhaps the progressive option would be to appraise them for what they are.
You might be right about this, but boy is it hard to do. For me at least.

I notice that the "Silverton" plan is enlarged�Gordon was 2100 SF while this is 2800 SF. They've also added a 4th bathroom, which seems somewhat un-"Usonian" for each room to have its own bath.

Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2018 11:24 am
by SDR
Heh-heh. I don't think that Mr Wright believed that his clients should suffer for his art; it just worked out that way, in some cases at least. If an owner can
afford for each bedroom to have its own bath, who are we to object ?

My belief is that the architect stretched the budget to gain his non-negotiables, namely generous roofs and masonry, and fine woodwork, sacrificing square
footage and certain technical niceties like adequate weatherproofing and drainage, in exchange.

Presumably, the owners of Lindal Wright-likes will not be subjected to such oversights and the resulting indignities . . .

SDR

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:54 pm
by Paul Ringstrom
I think the effort to bring back this type of home might spark a revival of mid-century modern design.

The fact that these examples have been modified for the current expectations of the potential buyers will result in a more successful business plan than a direct re-creation of the originals that we built at a time when the owners weren't as spoiled and/or affluent as now.

I purchased the printed booklet and was impressed, not because they were copies of the original, but because they were very suitable Wrightian-inspired creations.