Galena, Il. Nusonian by Genesis Architecture, Llc.

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.
peterm
Posts: 6293
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:27 am
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

Galena, Il. Nusonian by Genesis Architecture, Llc.

Post by peterm »


modern-eyes
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 9:24 pm
Location: Bergen County NJ

Post by modern-eyes »

I was just going to mention this article too. I think they really came close on this one. I think minor changes like the roof pitch, the stone switched to brick, the front door hardware, the kitchen cabinet doors(or maybe just the hardware), I also like when the built-ins have individual cushions instead of the long ones here. I'm also not sure if the concrete floor should bleed out the front like that. All in all I think this is a really well done house, and I am only nit picking.

peterm
Posts: 6293
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:27 am
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

Post by peterm »

Yes... And the great thing is they kept the scale. The master bedroom is intimate, bucking the trend of cherry picking some of Wright's most obvious details, but then super sizing the spaces.

I was amused by naming the tv room "the sanctum".

I think I miss the low parapet wall around the terrace. I remember when we were rebuilding ours, and we had finished the slab but the wall had not yet been erected, how odd that felt. The terrace wall creates an extra room and extends the house walls outward, increasing the apparent expansiveness of the composition.

But, all things considered, a fine job... All in 1340 square feet, the size of many custom house garages nowadays.

SDR
Posts: 20293
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Sweet. Nice design and flawless execution. Those floors are almost too perfect to believe ! (Perfection translates to "fake-looking" for some, apparently !)

The comments reveal that many people would have to visit this house to appreciate it. Computer room ? Doesn't everyone (but me) use a laptop, now ? Surround sound -- why not ? The sanctum looks great.

Cheers to Mr Dahlin and to his enlightened clients. A really compact house like this one is so rare -- and just what Sarah Susanka, the author of The Not So Sig House, was talking about . . .

SDR

SREcklund
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:24 pm
Location: Redondo Beach, CA

Post by SREcklund »

Maybe it's just me, but I thought the use of perf boards went a little over the top in terms of too much of a hat-tip to Mr. Wright, but a very respectable interpretation of the concept. Love the layout and the orientation - the tip of the terrace pointing to the setting sun; must be an amazing experience to watch.

Considering Usonians were _intended_ to be inexpensive, it would be interesting to know what it costs to design and build one in the 2010's ...

Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4419
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

Ken Dahlin has done beautiful work in the past with much larger houses. It is good to see that his firm can produce a small Wrightian design as well.

I thought the house was fabulous, but as with all Wright Chatters I have a couple of things that I would have done differently too.

1) The limestone is too formal as opposed to Wright's Fallingwater-style random layout. Replacing it with red brick, as suggested above, would maintain the formality but be more expected from that choice of material.

2) The contrast between the clear cedar wall covering on the interior vs. the knot-hole covered cedar on the exterior bothered me. It would seem to be more consistent to pick one or the other.

Kudos to Genesis Architecture!

I wonder what the $/sf was?
Owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond

clydethecat
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:29 pm

Post by clydethecat »

Paul Ringstrom wrote:
I wonder what the $/sf was?
That's the big question. Will this 1340 sq ft house cost as much as a 4000 sq ft McMansion?

pharding
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: River Forest, Illinois
Contact:

Post by pharding »

It is money well spent. Quality over quantity. Also the impact on the environment for construction and operation is much less than a McMansion.
Paul Harding FAIA Restoration Architect for FLW's 1901 E. Arthur Davenport House, 1941 Lloyd Lewis House, 1952 Glore House | www.harding.com | LinkedIn

DavidC
Posts: 8122
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »

Really nice take on a Nusonian. My biggest quibble is with the stone, also. I think it comes off looking too antiseptic - and too 'veneer-ish' (to coin a new term).

Thanks for posting this, Peter!


David

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10615
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

The only things I would alter are the size of the 2 acre lot and the landscaping. Eventually, like Jacobs II, this house is likely to be swamped with development, and the 2 acres will seem too small. The landscaping would look better if it were native plants rather than a traditional lawn.

Notice that the carport has not yet been constructed. Perhaps they plan to add that at a future date, and at the same time enclose the terrace with the wall shown on the plan.

Macrodex
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 2:11 pm

Post by Macrodex »

Looks kosher, however, the stone is too smooth, i.e. it's missing the Wright-flavor of having pieces stick out here and there ala Fallingwater, Kentuck Knob, etc.

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10615
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

Macrodex, I would suspect that's because it's stone veneer. The cost of a solid stone wall must be daunting.

SDR
Posts: 20293
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Nice thick veneer, judging by the outside corners. We object because it doesn't look like Wright -- but it's not a bad choice otherwise ? The small scale of the units suits the minimal size of the building.

We're uncomfortable with Wright being copied, and uncomfortable when it isn't Wrightian enough ! What's a fellow to do . . .

I could do without the double-specie veneered door, I think. Paul R had a good comment about the various wood textures. The token perfs are nicely done.

SDR

Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4419
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

SDR wrote:We're uncomfortable with Wright being copied, and uncomfortable when it isn't Wrightian enough ! What's a fellow to do . . .SDR
Yes, that indeed is the problem.

I lean to the side of the argument that the Nusonian should either incorporate Wrightian elements done properly (i.e., in the manner of Wright) or pick a different non-Wrightian material altogether, e.g. the stone work.
Owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond

SDR
Posts: 20293
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Let's be glad it doesn't look like this :

Image

Post Reply