EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
I don't understand why the doorway between living room and kitchen is so high, unless it was meant to be a standard height accordion door (as indicated on the Tasch plan) with a clerestory above.
Please, learn a bit about Minnesota before you denigrate it.
Minnesota is home to 19 Fortune 500 companies, including some you may have heard of, such as United Health (#5), Polaris, Hormel, Land o' Lakes, Ecolab, General Mills, 3M and Best Buy.
There are certainly enough millionaires here to justify the price of $1.5 million for a house. And, by the way, Minnesota is home to 6 Billionaires. Not exactly what you would expect from flyover country, is it?
But most importantly, per your figures, the house is highly overpriced for its location. How to account for that? Frank Lloyd Wright of course. If the current "owners" paid $1.3M and are going to put in another $2M then they have a $3.3M house in a $500,000 neighborhood. Good Luck with that.
The only justification for the $1.3M price is Wright's design and reputation, which they are ruining. Wish they would realize that.
I was in no way looking to denigrate Minnesota, all apologies if my wording suggested that. If my personal opinion matters to you, I'll confess that I'd choose a stable non-inflated economic region like Minneapolis over any of the "hotspot" economic areas in this country, where the cost-of-living has all but excluded people of modest means. Essentially, any place where "$1.5m isn't a lot of money" for a house, is in my view problematic.
The finer suburbs were also (in the past, I assume) home to more board chairmen of Fortune 500 companies than any other metropolitan area. Deephaven, in its heyday, was a sort of upscale New Canaan, CT.
The total area of Mpls. + StP. = 113.8 sm., as opposed to 33.6 sm. for Manhattan. The combined population of the Cities is 707,399, compared with 1,664,727 for Manhattan. For density, do the math. The Cities have so much park land, including 22 lakes, that everyone in the metro area could be comfortably accommodated at once.
I am thinking of the banking or lending laws unique to South Dakota that made it a no-brainer for the big banks to establish headquarters there . . . if I have that right.
https://www.marketplace.org/2009/03/25/ ... edit-built
Or are there other reasons that the state became home to so many prominent companies, over the years ?