Article: David Wright owner buys adjacent properties

DavidC · Post by **DavidC** » Thu Dec 08, 2016 12:01 pm

Here's a different link with the same information.

David

DRN · Post by **DRN** » Thu Dec 08, 2016 12:32 pm

Thanks David.

The threat of a lawsuit led Phoenix leaders to back off a city-initiated plan to designate a Frank Lloyd Wright designed house a historic landmark.

OK, a suit by whom?

For years, council members have delayed acting on the designation, but the ownerâ€™s pledge to sue citing economic harm to his property rights forced a vote Wednesday in the ownerâ€™s favor.

Rawlings' pledge to sue, or the surrounding property owners pledge to sue?

Since then, a new owner has bought adjacent properties and asked for 5.9 acres to be granted landmark status. The ownerâ€™s attorney, Michael Kibler told council members their focus on the 2.45 acres has hurt his client.

So, has this been an argument over landmark designation of the house and 2.45 AC vs. the house and 5.9 AC? It would seem it has been...

In the end, council members withdrew the proposal and the owner will continue seeking historic status for the 5.9 acres which includes the house.

Which means the house is not protected. If the grand plans never reach fruition, and the house goes on the market, it is unprotected from a developer wanting to divide and McMansion. Isn't job one protect the house? Or, does landmarking 2.45AC preclude the "grand plan" on the assembled 5.9AC?

Roderick Grant · Post by **Roderick Grant** » Thu Dec 08, 2016 12:47 pm

This article must have been written by a millennial. They have terrible communicating skills. The story may be in there, hiding among commas and apostrophes, but it lacks clarity.

SREcklund · Post by **SREcklund** » Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:28 pm

DRN wrote:Which means the house is not protected. If the grand plans never reach fruition, and the house goes on the market, it is unprotected from a developer wanting to divide and McMansion. Isn't job one protect the house? Or, does landmarking 2.45AC preclude the "grand plan" on the assembled 5.9AC?

It sounds like a lot of the Wright folks in the community have faith in Rawlings' intentions. The Foundation is supporting his efforts, Victor Sidy is on board as their new architect, and everyone I've talked to closer to the issue than I believes in what they're trying to do. If they back away from the entertainment venue they were envisioning in favor for restored groves and a preserved house, they have my support. But I await proof ...

DavidC · Post by **DavidC** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 6:50 pm

Phoenix Preservation Advocate Weighs In On Wright House Ruling - [4:33]

David

DavidC · Post by **DavidC** » Tue Dec 20, 2016 8:12 am

Why the Wright House Preservationists Deserved an AIA Arizona Award

David

DRN · Post by **DRN** » Tue Dec 20, 2016 10:13 am

So the goal is to landmark the assembled lots as a whole, presumably to enable a single use, and possibly prevent obstruction to use due to landmarking on part vs. whole? As long as the house is restored, financially stable, and isn't threatened by sale for demolition...

Angry architects over an AIA award going to non-architects for saving a historic building? Some architects can be pretty catty, but this would be beyond the pale.

Roderick Grant · Post by **Roderick Grant** » Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:57 am

I like the "chicken-wire-and-plywood faux Italian domiciles" comment.

DavidC · Post by **DavidC** » Fri Dec 01, 2017 1:12 pm

Bringing the David Wright thread back post-apocalypse.

David

DavidC · Post by **DavidC** » Mon Dec 04, 2017 3:34 pm

Rare Frank Lloyd Wright tiny home is an Ã¢â‚¬Ëœodd duckÃ¢â‚¬â„¢

David

Roderick Grant · Post by **Roderick Grant** » Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:04 pm

Who's right? The article assumes the guest house was designed by FLW. Storrer says Jack Howe. I tend to side with Bill.

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:22 pm

Storrer (1993): "A guesthouse to the north is by John H Howe. To the south is a home for David's son, David Lloyd Wright, designed by elder brother, Lloyd Wright."

Storrer does not date these constructions. But the latter house appears, in brief, in Alan Weintraub's Lloyd Wright monograph:

This house may have disappeared. It's site would seem, from Google maps and views, to have occupied the sand-colored plot seen south of the David Wright house, in this aerial:

Here is what the most recent street view shows, for that site. The rock formations visible in Weintraub's photo of the David Lloyd Wright house can be seen above the white four-door vehicle at left, below:

The entrance to the David Wright house, whose address according to Storrer is 5212 East Exeter, is actually on N Rubicon Ave:

DavidC · Post by **DavidC** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:14 am

New lease of life for iconic spiral-shaped Frank Lloyd Wright House

David

DRN · Post by **DRN** » Wed Jun 27, 2018 6:26 pm

Sadly, IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m not surprised by this:

http://davidwrighthouse.org/joint-state ... ociety_103

Whether it is as a single parcel or as the consolidated collection of acquired lots, the house needs to be landmarked SOONER RATHER THAN LATER before itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s ownership changes again.

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Wed Jun 27, 2018 7:40 pm

I'm surprised to hear that the house hasn't already been landmarked. That would be an important step, I imagine.

What is meant by "independence of the school" ? What changed, and what is the school now independent of ? Pardon my ignorance.

"Uncertainty regarding future capital improvements at the House and the long-term cultural development of the site in Phoenix increased this concern." In
terms of "what next," this sentence is perhaps the crux of the statement. It doesn't sound like doom is imminent, rather that a different source of funding
is now required. Do I have that right ?

SDR