Wild Bird

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.
mdgraham
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:52 pm

Post by mdgraham »

The house was built and completed in 1958-59. See TIME link I posted. Thats 50 years. Forget your sloppy math and 60-70 years ago. Not the 1930's. Not the 1940's. 1959. see wikipedia under WILD BIRD and Nat Ownings.
FLW Was NOT the architect on Wild Bird. instead it was low profile Genius named Mark Mills. NOT FLW. He actually was pretty good at keeping his roofs from leaking. Among other construction defects.

Is there a way to resto-mod a house? I can't say. I do not market on this site.

My clients pay me for other services. Believe me if there is a way to "resto-mod a house?" I will advise. And likely LOOSE the project/commission/job. Sobeit. NO is the most powerful word in the english language. I;ll take the TOXIC MATERIALS LIE up with the expert at a later date. It defies any explanation and is not credible. She worked for someone who paid her to say it with NO BACKUP.

hometheater
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 4:35 pm

Post by hometheater »

yes, I know this was built in the late 50s, that's why I picked the 1957 corvette example. I also know this was not a FLW house.

I was asking a general question about the concept. If someone were to buy a historic Wright house (some of which were built in the 30's) Would there be an acceptable way to add things like grounded outlets, a security system, and internet access? Could you put a microwave in hallowed ground?

I am not marketing. Believe me, this is NOT my market.

SDR
Posts: 18683
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Yes, old houses are often updated in subtle and sensitive ways. There is a 100+ yr old house on another thread here, which an experienced restoration architect is rescuing for his own use. The Ross house has received a modern roof on top of the original structure, in a way which almost invisibly enhances the energy performance of the structure. Unoriginal additions to the house have been removed, windows restored or replicated as needed, and a modern heating system and other mechanical upgrades will be installed, rendering the house fit for another century of use while recreating Wright's original architecture in every way. A 100-year old kitchen design is unlikely to provide what is needed today, so the architect has devised a sympathetic new design for that portion of the house -- and some upstairs rooms have been slightly reorganized for similar reasons, without compromising the original character of the structure.

http://savewright.org/wright_chat/viewt ... light=ross


The better architects have always sought to create an entire environment, inside and out, including furnishings and landscaping, in order to provide a well-coordinated and complete experience for the occupants, and a satisfying aesthetic whole. This is true of many of the twentieth-century designers we call modernists. Wright's oldest son, Frank Lloyd Wright, Jr (known as Lloyd) specialized in landscape in his early career, and so provided the many homes he designed in Southern California with especially complete exterior environments.

Many architectural practitioners maintain interior specialists on staff, to coordinate material and furnishing choices and lighting design with the overall concept. Other architects leave interior design to someone chosen by their client.

SDR

As for the "unsafe" studio or workshop at Wild Bird, a complete restoration might have included a replica of that space in more acceptable material. And that part of the house could have found a new use, such as a guest suite or home office, etc, if desired. "Adaptive reuse" is one popular strategy for retaining significant structure.

KevinW
Posts: 1280
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 6:41 pm

Post by KevinW »

To be accurate, Wild Bird did not receive an award of merit in 2009 from the San Jose AIA. The Architect was a juror for the 2009 San Joaquin Chapter Design Awards. His bio mentions that he just completed a house named Wild Bird...no mention that it was a remodel / addition.

In the case of one of a kind properties like the former Wild Bird, Restoration should be the first consideration. A team of professionals experienced in Historic properties should have been employed. Several things broke down in this project, starting with the "expert" stating that the house was without architectural significance....but Wild Bird LLC's partners were no doubt behind that..

The dramatic site, the wealth of the area, the desire to use WB as a $15K a night hide away, and a savvy owner pretty much sealed WB's fate. I understand that.
KevinW

hometheater
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 4:35 pm

Post by hometheater »

mdgraham - as the Mills expert, do you know did he do the interiors also?

Wild Bird seems very different from any other thing I can find he has done. Most remind me of the "house of the future"

Image
and some are pretty mundane:

http://www.movoto.com/real-estate/homes ... 102163.htm

SDR
Posts: 18683
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

I have yet to see another work of Mark Mills which interests me as much as the Big Sur opus. Will we ever know how much input Nat Owings had into the design ?


SDR

KevinW
Posts: 1280
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 6:41 pm

Post by KevinW »

I have some pics of some Mills work that will interest you, if I find them tonite I'll scan them at work tomorrow.
KevinW

Unbrook
Posts: 706
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 11:19 am
Location: Lakewood, Ohio

Wild Bird

Post by Unbrook »

I am late to this thread, and would like to add to the comment about Wingspread a while ago. The story about water dripping on the dining room chair during a dinner party does have a part 2. I have heard that the next day Mr. Wright sent a team from Taliesin to solve the problem.

What to do with significant residential architecture? I believe we must preserve the structure as much as possible, but we can't all live in museums.
I think an hommage to the original design is mandatory. Documentation of the original building is the best we can do. At the Weltzheimer House, we present the basics of the Wright design, with the modifications that occured as the house was being built and with the various owners. I believe this invites dialogue and ultimately shows the genius of its architect.

mdgraham
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:52 pm

Post by mdgraham »

myLiebermeisterAGG-
thank you. I stand corrected on the juror error.
http://archop.org/2010/02/design-awards/

Education Professor
Posts: 594
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:10 pm

Post by Education Professor »

To paraphrase my grandfather, I think that Wild Bird from Mills'/Owings' time has flown the coop.

EP

http://www.handpickedvillas.com/wild-bird/

Tom
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:53 pm
Location: Black Mountain, NC

Post by Tom »

I've got a deep hatred toward the perpetrators of this. It cannot be overstated.

SDR
Posts: 18683
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Calm down, son -- this too will pass. The present state of the house is a great alternative to demolition. The bones are still there, and visible; a third architect might someday do something worthwhile with the remains . . .

SDR

Tom
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:53 pm
Location: Black Mountain, NC

Post by Tom »

Okay. But I think I disagree that the present state of the house is better than demolition.

SDR
Posts: 18683
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Tsk. Well, I sympathize with your outrage, of course -- but the building site deserves to be utilized for some functional and pleasurable purpose, and it presently supports an enclosure which retains the original architect's chosen exposures and other responses -- in a condition which can be described as pleasant, even sophisticated. The remodeling could have been far, far worse.

One might almost think that the present designer had a certain respect for what came before, while succumbing -- let's assume under financial pressures -- to the ubiquitous desire for ostentatious luxury ?

SDR

Tom
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:53 pm
Location: Black Mountain, NC

Post by Tom »

SDR, thanks for your sympathy the reason for which I know you share at least in part. I disagree that the site deserves to be used. But arguing this would ruin my day. I understand something of what you are trying to say but honestly I'm just not there. I'd prefer to see the pile taken down, the promontory restored to creation, and Wild Bird only in memory at this point. I know all that has nothing to do with "reality." But I believe it nevertheless.

Post Reply