Chahroudi / Massaro residence on Petre Island

To control SPAM, you must now be a registered user to post to this Message Board.

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.
Roderick Grant
Posts: 9895
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

I'm too old to remember the name, but there is a zinc-oxide based unquent popular with teens that might serve as an appropriate name for this house. What is it?

SDR
Posts: 18838
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Pox-B-Gone ? No, that's not it. . .



SDR

pharding
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: River Forest, Illinois
Contact:

Post by pharding »

Thanks for posting the photographs. What an absolutely dreadful building! I am sorry, but ersatz Frank Lloyd Wright just does not do it here or any place else. Throughout his career FLW valued natural materials, natural finishes, and design consistency among other things. Here we see rocks, not even stone, glued on ordinary concrete in a cheap, ill-conceived manner. Then we have painted concrete that is totally irrelevant to the rest of the building. This building is a poster child for the fallacy of the so-called Legacy Projects. Ersatz Frank Lloyd Wright, even if well intentioned, is worse than the dreaded McMansions. At least McMansions don't claim to be architecturally significant or that they were magically designed by a great architect who passed away 50 years ago.
Paul Harding FAIA Owner and Restoration Architect for FLW's 1901 E. Arthur Davenport House, the First Prairie School House in Chicago | www.harding.com | LinkedIn

dkottum
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 8:52 pm
Location: Battle Lake, MN

Post by dkottum »

It is incorrect to call this building a poster child of the Legacy projects, because it is not a Legacy project, nor did Taliesin have anything to do with its final design or construction. It appears to be the result of rich man with poor aesthetic sense influencing the design work of a highly competent architect. It is the detailing, not he design concept, that stinks.

Doug Kottum, Battle Lake, MN

RJH
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Contact:

Post by RJH »

It appears to be the result of rich man with poor aesthetic sense influencing the design work of a highly competent architect. It is the detailing, not he design concept, that stinks.
I don't think it is Massaro's fault. He had a vision and took a lot of risk as all past Wright clients had. A self made man and perfect Wright client. Tom Heinz, Architect, was hired so the house would "turn out" as Wright envisioned. Who really failed here besides Phil Alsop and the FLW Foundation???

GALLERY:
Image
LAST BR AT END OF GALLERY W/FIREPLACE:
Image

Image

Image

outside in
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:02 pm
Location: chicago

Post by outside in »

Its been driving me crazy, but I finally remembered - instead of Clearview, or Fallingwater, we can call it

CLEARASIL

SDR
Posts: 18838
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Got it !

In connection with therapeutic chemical substances, the last photo above shows two kinds of plastic foam insulation, if I'm not mistaken. . .


SDR

Roderick Grant
Posts: 9895
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

RJH, I agree with you wholeheartedly. The mess is Tom Heinz's fault. In the past, Tom did some excellent restorations of FLW buildings, but this is not a success. Knowing that the original construction method could not be used (even though the adjacent cottage has weathered quite well), he should have come up with a better alternative system. Massaro is off the hook, in my estimation.

Randolph C. Henning
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 9:04 am
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Post by Randolph C. Henning »

With all due respect, before you all assign fault onto Tom Heinz, you should personally meet Massaro. After that I bet the bank that you'll most likely change your mind. Doug Kottum hit the nail square on the head. And why RJH continues to bring the Legacy program and the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation into this discussion I'll never understand. They had nothing (NOTHING) to do with this abomination.

RJH
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Contact:

Post by RJH »

I had met Massaro when I was at the property taking all these photos. From what I know about him he is a self made man who invented some sort of new device that revolutionized the sheet metal industry. Or something to that affect. This is no different than original Wright clients such as Gillin, Hoffman, Hughes, Kaufman and all the rest of the mavericks Wright took on as clients. Wright actually preferred this type of client.

Your comments make it sound like Massaro called all the shots and therefore responsible for the failure and not Heinz. You can go back and look at all the other original Wright clients that called their own shots – Hagan (with the enlarged living room, MBR and basement), Neils (use of aluminum window and door frames), and all the others. It is a long list. The facts are all those projects resulted in a successful design upon completion.

This was the opportunity of a lifetime for the Foundation to take on a high profile well funded project. In the end, they failed miserably. Phil Alsop and the Foundation created their own reputation. Not me.

outside in
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:02 pm
Location: chicago

Post by outside in »

I'm at a loss to understand why the Foundation should be held accountable for a building that they had nothing to do with. Its my understanding that the owner was offered their services, and he felt that the cost was excessive - enter Heinz - old adage here, you get what you pay for........

Wrighter
Posts: 485
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:22 am
Location: St. Louis, MO

Post by Wrighter »

http://architecturelab.net/2007/09/15/loving-frank/

This is a link to a post with several pictures/views that I hadn't come across before. My bad in advance if the link's already been posted here.

Are the concrete walls as blue as they look in the 6th photo here? Surely, they cannot be and it's just the photo. And I know it's been mentioned before, but what possible reason can there be for stone in the master bedroom and modified/dessicated rubblestone in the rest of the house?

That just feels like a doozy of a departure.

hypnoraygun
Posts: 561
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Missouri

Post by hypnoraygun »

Just my thoughts.. I think the place looks amazing! EXCEPT the rubblestone. Could that be improved upon? Or would it be just too much money after just building the place to fix? I have never been there, but the rest of the place looks very good to me. But that rubblestone looks kind of comical..

JimM
Posts: 1509
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: Austin,Texas

Post by JimM »

hypnoraygun wrote:Just my thoughts.. I think the place looks amazing! EXCEPT the rubblestone. Could that be improved upon? Or would it be just too much money after just building the place to fix? I have never been there, but the rest of the place looks very good to me. But that rubblestone looks kind of comical..
At least dry stack rubble stone to the facade! I never understood that "insulation" bit about all that concrete; and who knows what the controlling factor was (I believe Massaro, since I can't fathom Heinz coming up with that after the attention to other detail throughout-probably the same story with the wierd masonry departure in the bedroom).

SDR
Posts: 18838
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

The client is often the culprit in a compromised work of architecture. Ennis is another example. . .


SDR

Post Reply