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.
Sorry Roderick I disagree. This was not an issue with the Storer house. Any of those could function as door I agree. But the one used as a door had a door knob and different detailing. Also at the top of the entry steps. No one would ever confused which “aperture” was the entry door, so I’m not sure where you are getting your information.Roderick Grant wrote: ↑Fri Aug 27, 2021 11:17 am"Amusing"? Well, I don't know about that.... The single aperture out of 5 at Storer indicated to be the entrance, I have always considered a design flaw.
For the most circuitous route from sidewalk to confronting the fireplace at the heart of the house, the ten right-angled turns one makes at Emil Bach must take the cake.