A planning grid is not something to be laid over a design after it is drawn; it is meant to guide the designer from the first stroke.
A design thoughtfully and consistently made to a grid module would not exhibit cabinetry (in the passage) or seating (living room) which was at odds with the rhythm of the windows immediately adjacent. While practical considerations like material dimensions, storage requirements, or available window sizes have their appropriate place in the design decisions, aesthetic concerns are important too, and the inspired designer will typically rectify matters to accommodate both the chosen grid and the recognized necessities.
Likewise, the grid functions to defeat questionable decisions such as the spaced windows in the master bedroom -- inconsistent with all the other paired or ganged fenestration in the plan. Consistency is the mark of masterful architecture -- like that of Frank Lloyd Wright.
SDR
Want to build Usonian - Advise?
And, I'd like to second what Doug has written. Wright would be dismayed, or worse, to find someone copying (more or less) the plan of a house, without regard to the orientation, contours, climate and views of the site this new version would occupy. While there are differing opinions on how we should be inspired by Wright's work as we build for ourselves -- some, including me, favor the faithful replication of a chosen design, as one approach, while others (including Wright himself) insisted that others imbibe the spirit rather than the letter of that work -- all would agree with the architect that each project must begin with the land, its particular features and attributes, and that the design must grow from that unique set of realities.
SDR
SDR
Usonian design
A word about entry, corners, and dead ends.
The Usonian entry is perhaps like the introduction of a book, doesn't reveal much, but sets the tone for the experience you are about to receive. Its materials and furnishings are exactly what you will find throughout the house. It has a low ceiling that expands dramatically as you enter the living spaces. It should give you a choice of direction, to service areas or more clearly to living area. If a wood ceiling, the pattern of the boards will lead you into the living space, then turn you to the direction of the view. It is a formal space without the grand.
Wright hated corners. They were a trap for his spaces. He would miter the glass around the corner, step it back into an alcove, run shelves or cabinets around it, maybe all of these to make it disappear. He was an artist and a magician.
An effort is always made to make something of the end of a passageway. Never just a blank wall. A window, door, cabinet, a bedroom fireplace, or an angle to another space, it led to something.
These seemingly practical elements were exploited beyond decoration, to expand the freedom of Wright's spaces, the corner window being the most effective and stunning.
doug k
The Usonian entry is perhaps like the introduction of a book, doesn't reveal much, but sets the tone for the experience you are about to receive. Its materials and furnishings are exactly what you will find throughout the house. It has a low ceiling that expands dramatically as you enter the living spaces. It should give you a choice of direction, to service areas or more clearly to living area. If a wood ceiling, the pattern of the boards will lead you into the living space, then turn you to the direction of the view. It is a formal space without the grand.
Wright hated corners. They were a trap for his spaces. He would miter the glass around the corner, step it back into an alcove, run shelves or cabinets around it, maybe all of these to make it disappear. He was an artist and a magician.
An effort is always made to make something of the end of a passageway. Never just a blank wall. A window, door, cabinet, a bedroom fireplace, or an angle to another space, it led to something.
These seemingly practical elements were exploited beyond decoration, to expand the freedom of Wright's spaces, the corner window being the most effective and stunning.
doug k
The Usonian workspace, galley, or kitchen was intentionally small. The dining table was just at its edge, preferably attached, to eliminate the need for another table within the space. It was adjacent to the main living space so the "cook" could share conversation with the family. It never was a passage from one space to another.
The workspace was usually in a high-ceiling chamber with clerestories or opening skylights to ventilate the space as the heated air would rise up and out (open a bedroom window, turn on the oven, cool the house). For that reason, the utilities and laundry facilities were also here, maybe around a corner or behind a door.
There was no difference (preferably) in cabinetry, flooring or ceiling materials than the rest of the house. It could be considered an extension of the living space, as nicely organized and finished.
doug k
The workspace was usually in a high-ceiling chamber with clerestories or opening skylights to ventilate the space as the heated air would rise up and out (open a bedroom window, turn on the oven, cool the house). For that reason, the utilities and laundry facilities were also here, maybe around a corner or behind a door.
There was no difference (preferably) in cabinetry, flooring or ceiling materials than the rest of the house. It could be considered an extension of the living space, as nicely organized and finished.
doug k
-
Roderick Grant
- Posts: 11815
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
dkottum, excellent advice.
A house has to sit on its site and relate to the environment, so being too specific without first acquiring the land is futile. Even if this were to be built on a flat urban lot, the location, orientation, etc of neighboring buildings and landscaping should have an impact on the shape of the house. Now is the time to deal with generalities and to examine exactly how each interior space is to be used, and how much (or little) space is needed.
A house has to sit on its site and relate to the environment, so being too specific without first acquiring the land is futile. Even if this were to be built on a flat urban lot, the location, orientation, etc of neighboring buildings and landscaping should have an impact on the shape of the house. Now is the time to deal with generalities and to examine exactly how each interior space is to be used, and how much (or little) space is needed.
-
Laurie Virr
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:32 pm
As has been stated above, any design that is to reflect the Usonian philosophy must start with the nature of the site.
Attempting to design one’s own house is akin to tailoring one’s own suit: for the best results it is advisable to commission a specialist to do it.
One of the characteristics of the Usonian houses, particularly the earliest, was the emphasis in the allocation of area to those spaces where the occupants were wide awake: those associated with living and dining. The areas of less activity, where folk were either bathing or somnolent, were small but adequate.
Clients commission professionals to perform tasks they know, in their wisdom, they cannot execute to the required standard themselves. A real architect can furnish a design which will provide equal or greater utility in less space than can a layman, an important consideration in an age where building materials and labor are expensive. [A plumber in this country can earn more than the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, a circumstance surely reflected in many countries around the world, where the height of youthful ambition is to become an information technologist].
The savings achieved by adopting such a procedure would go some way to meeting an architect’s fees.
Attempting to design one’s own house is akin to tailoring one’s own suit: for the best results it is advisable to commission a specialist to do it.
One of the characteristics of the Usonian houses, particularly the earliest, was the emphasis in the allocation of area to those spaces where the occupants were wide awake: those associated with living and dining. The areas of less activity, where folk were either bathing or somnolent, were small but adequate.
Clients commission professionals to perform tasks they know, in their wisdom, they cannot execute to the required standard themselves. A real architect can furnish a design which will provide equal or greater utility in less space than can a layman, an important consideration in an age where building materials and labor are expensive. [A plumber in this country can earn more than the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, a circumstance surely reflected in many countries around the world, where the height of youthful ambition is to become an information technologist].
The savings achieved by adopting such a procedure would go some way to meeting an architect’s fees.
An architect, more so than any layman, is exquisitely aware that only a small fraction of the homes that are built every year have had anything at all to do with the services of an architect. As such, the architect hopes only that his few clients will carry the message, once it is received, that the blessing bestowed on their lives by their interaction with their architect, will have enhanced their remaining years.
Did young Herb Jacobs, or his wife Katherine, imagine that they could provide themselves with a valid and useful plan for their first real home ? Why did they appeal to Mr Wright to provide them with that service ? As stretched as their budget was, did they begrudge their architect his 10% fee ?
Their choice of architect resulted in a world-famous work of art -- and a home and an experience that they enjoyed enough to twice more commission the same architect to design them further projects, the second of which resulted in another masterpiece, which they enjoyed for the remainder of their lives.
Do we imagine that, now that those works of design are readily available to all, on paper, that we no longer require the services of an architect, when we wish to proceed with building for outselves ? That we can simply copy one of those unique works, and dispense with the professional service which made them possible -- for their unique clients, on a one-of-a kind building site -- in the first place ?
SDR
Did young Herb Jacobs, or his wife Katherine, imagine that they could provide themselves with a valid and useful plan for their first real home ? Why did they appeal to Mr Wright to provide them with that service ? As stretched as their budget was, did they begrudge their architect his 10% fee ?
Their choice of architect resulted in a world-famous work of art -- and a home and an experience that they enjoyed enough to twice more commission the same architect to design them further projects, the second of which resulted in another masterpiece, which they enjoyed for the remainder of their lives.
Do we imagine that, now that those works of design are readily available to all, on paper, that we no longer require the services of an architect, when we wish to proceed with building for outselves ? That we can simply copy one of those unique works, and dispense with the professional service which made them possible -- for their unique clients, on a one-of-a kind building site -- in the first place ?
SDR
I am still amazed at the amount of information I am receiving from others on this board.
Just want to address a few of the things that really stood out in the comments:
1) I am using chief architect to sort of put our requirements into a visual form. It does not have a grid system (that I know of but I am still learning it). My intention is to refine refine refine with CA and then hand draw. I did study architecture in school and it was at the time we were changing from hand drawings to computer and I do fully intent to hand-draw it. I still have all my drafting tools from then.
2) I do understand about the study of the land first. I just want to say my thinking on coming up with a design before hand. Again, this is simply a way for me to pass on my requirements to an architect once that point in the project comes. I was a software analyst and we had the same issue with clients. People do not think in requirements ("The user must be able to store their address in the system for later access"), they think in screens and typically a client would deliver screen mockups to us and it was up to us to first translate those into requirements then make sure what they drew us was meeting those requirements as well as codes, laws, fit the system it was designed for and a million other details. So as I said, the design is merely an exercise for me to apply how I see (and more importantly how my wife and girls see) the requirements. We do fully intend to hire an architect when the time comes. OK, back to the land issue. All land here is relatively flat farmland. There is a few sloping areas that are too built up and we do not want to be near anyone. The only uniqueness we have run across so far is the width vs. length (some farms are 200' X 2000' and others are 800' X 800'), the side of the concession it is on, if there are wind turbines are around us (and if they are not they will likely be soon) and lastly, most importantly, if the farm has a treed area on it (rare). There is no sloping to the south as the land is totally flat farmland here. The other issue we are experiencing is the timing of owning the property to the time of the permits, etc, etc, that may just not allow us to own the land before it is designed. We are hoping for this scenario but as I have talked to others that have done this (gone off the grid so to speak), they end up running out of money before the city even approves their plans and end up selling out and buying
a used house for $100K less. I guess what I am saying in a round about way is we want to have our requirements absolutely ready before we buy the land, hire an architect, anything. And this is the only way I know how my wife and I can understand those requirements.
3) I do see what Doug is saying "So the house cannot be designed until you have the land. Keep drawing (without a computer) however, so that your family can not only see what you need but what you really don't need, which is essential to the Usonian idea. And you will learn how to get pleasing elevations and sections from the floor plan."
When I really began to think what was not necessary and what my wife says is a must, we began to understanding how we can cut out this or that and I am positive the design that we come up with will be the most elegant solution to all our issues. The part of Doug's statement regarding "so that your family can not only see what you need but what you really don't need..." is a powerful one and the one that keeps me staring at that design over and over. I dont know who said it but elegance of design is
the most difficult thing to attain right off the bat.
4) The L shape plan is simply the one usonian design that we liked the best. We are not stuck to it but it is the one we most picture ourselves living in, especially with the interior garden (yes I should have drawn the patios and this on the plan but cant figure a few things out on chief a.
5) SDR said, "Wright would be dismayed, or worse, to find someone copying (more or less) the plan of a house without regard to the orientation, contours, climate and views of the site this new version would occupy..." Very true and as I said above, this is merely a way for me to refine our requirements and be able to communicate them to the architect and each other. One of the weird things about this is when we are looking at properties, we are seeing things (realizing would be a better word) we never saw at the beginning about the land and it's views. As I also said, most land however here is flat farmland for miles. There was one property we looked at that has been sitting for a long time that we dont know what was so different except it had 3 wind turbines 2000 FT away and the property was a perfect square (800X800) which caught our eye as it is the shape we most relate to FLW.
6) Doug also said, "The Usonian workspace, galley, or kitchen was intentionally small. The dining table was just at its edge, preferably attached, to eliminate the need for another table within the space. It was adjacent to the main living space so the "cook" could share conversation with the family. It never was a passage from one space to another." This is one point of contention with my wife and I. She did not like Kentuck Knob's kitchen, mostly the fact that there was no windows and a space
to sit while cooking. We have both spoken about this feature of my design for hours (by the way, the corners of the kitchen, living room and office are supposed to me mitred corner windows, the software will just not do that function. It will be on my hand drawings later.) It is something I do intended to speak to the architect much more about (and the entrance). It is also, more or less, our own unique feature. We currently have what would be considered an eat in kitchen with both an eat at counter and 6 person dining table (no dining room in the house). And we know it is what we love about this house.
7) Roderick Grant said, "Now is the time to deal with generalities and to examine exactly how each interior space is to be used, and how much (or little) space is needed." As above, what I am doing with the plans is trying to communicate with my wife and family our needs. I dont know how many times she has said, "I cant picture what you are describing, can you draw it?" I do remember how much I hated as a software guy people giving me screen mockups without even knowing what their requirements of the system were, but it is how people think, visually. So I do ask patience with this side of this project, please. I do wish to share all of this experience, even this stage of it so that others can see what is involved. I actually do know others that are considering this and I think a sort of revival of this style home will eventually come about, especially with the baby-boomer generation.
Laurie said, "One of the characteristics of the Usonian houses, particularly the earliest, was the emphasis in the allocation of area to those spaces where the occupants were wide awake: those associated with living and dining. The areas of less activity, where folk were either bathing or somnolent, were small but adequate. " This is one thing we are learning and understanding more with our current space. We are reducing the amount of "things" and are really questioning "do we really need this? Is it in the right spot of the house? What if it was not there? What if we didnt have room to store it what would we do? We find ourselves doing this at other peoples homes as well. Something that helps us connect more with each other about what is coming.
9) SDR's last comment regarding the hiring of an architect, I do fully agree with. I can design marketing campaigns that are so elegant for small and medium businesses that get results that a layman just cannot even hope to do as fast or on budget as I can. But it is almost always a hard sell to that same business. I do intend to hire the architect when the time comes. I have tried to contact a few of the ones recommended on a
preliminary basis and I will be dealing with Tim a bit more in the spring.
10) My last comment (sorry about the length of this post, I just want to address people's comments and sort of let you know my reasoning for certain things) is one thing I have realized more and more over time is the importance of the budget, materials, the plan and the ways to mitigate things. My wife keeps saying it could be a year before we even start, why are you putting so much thought into it? It is because I want to mitigate what seems to be the killer of most projects of this sort -- poor
planning and lack of knowledge of unknowns. For instance, some of the comments Tim Sutton told me, I would have never thought of myself. Certain situations come up you cannot predict or think of yourself. He told me about cutting the grid pattern in floor and not being able to reach where the line met the walls. The other is his design of a 2 slab foundation (one 'working' slab, then foam, then the finish slab). Or how he kept the heating lines from floating to the top of the slab (put the wire mess over the lines which solved two issues, spacing and floating). These are things I would have never learned without this process but want to learn and know before we even buy the land. I am also gaining a much deeper understanding of usonian design that I do not think I would have gotten just hiring an architect and throwing money at it. As someone said, the Jacobs home was an experience to them, not just a piece of paper to sign. I want that whole experience and then some. Again, I do thank everyone for the comments and directions. I am learning so much from each person and if I can return that favour for anyone, just let me know.
Just want to address a few of the things that really stood out in the comments:
1) I am using chief architect to sort of put our requirements into a visual form. It does not have a grid system (that I know of but I am still learning it). My intention is to refine refine refine with CA and then hand draw. I did study architecture in school and it was at the time we were changing from hand drawings to computer and I do fully intent to hand-draw it. I still have all my drafting tools from then.
2) I do understand about the study of the land first. I just want to say my thinking on coming up with a design before hand. Again, this is simply a way for me to pass on my requirements to an architect once that point in the project comes. I was a software analyst and we had the same issue with clients. People do not think in requirements ("The user must be able to store their address in the system for later access"), they think in screens and typically a client would deliver screen mockups to us and it was up to us to first translate those into requirements then make sure what they drew us was meeting those requirements as well as codes, laws, fit the system it was designed for and a million other details. So as I said, the design is merely an exercise for me to apply how I see (and more importantly how my wife and girls see) the requirements. We do fully intend to hire an architect when the time comes. OK, back to the land issue. All land here is relatively flat farmland. There is a few sloping areas that are too built up and we do not want to be near anyone. The only uniqueness we have run across so far is the width vs. length (some farms are 200' X 2000' and others are 800' X 800'), the side of the concession it is on, if there are wind turbines are around us (and if they are not they will likely be soon) and lastly, most importantly, if the farm has a treed area on it (rare). There is no sloping to the south as the land is totally flat farmland here. The other issue we are experiencing is the timing of owning the property to the time of the permits, etc, etc, that may just not allow us to own the land before it is designed. We are hoping for this scenario but as I have talked to others that have done this (gone off the grid so to speak), they end up running out of money before the city even approves their plans and end up selling out and buying
a used house for $100K less. I guess what I am saying in a round about way is we want to have our requirements absolutely ready before we buy the land, hire an architect, anything. And this is the only way I know how my wife and I can understand those requirements.
3) I do see what Doug is saying "So the house cannot be designed until you have the land. Keep drawing (without a computer) however, so that your family can not only see what you need but what you really don't need, which is essential to the Usonian idea. And you will learn how to get pleasing elevations and sections from the floor plan."
When I really began to think what was not necessary and what my wife says is a must, we began to understanding how we can cut out this or that and I am positive the design that we come up with will be the most elegant solution to all our issues. The part of Doug's statement regarding "so that your family can not only see what you need but what you really don't need..." is a powerful one and the one that keeps me staring at that design over and over. I dont know who said it but elegance of design is
the most difficult thing to attain right off the bat.
4) The L shape plan is simply the one usonian design that we liked the best. We are not stuck to it but it is the one we most picture ourselves living in, especially with the interior garden (yes I should have drawn the patios and this on the plan but cant figure a few things out on chief a.
5) SDR said, "Wright would be dismayed, or worse, to find someone copying (more or less) the plan of a house without regard to the orientation, contours, climate and views of the site this new version would occupy..." Very true and as I said above, this is merely a way for me to refine our requirements and be able to communicate them to the architect and each other. One of the weird things about this is when we are looking at properties, we are seeing things (realizing would be a better word) we never saw at the beginning about the land and it's views. As I also said, most land however here is flat farmland for miles. There was one property we looked at that has been sitting for a long time that we dont know what was so different except it had 3 wind turbines 2000 FT away and the property was a perfect square (800X800) which caught our eye as it is the shape we most relate to FLW.
6) Doug also said, "The Usonian workspace, galley, or kitchen was intentionally small. The dining table was just at its edge, preferably attached, to eliminate the need for another table within the space. It was adjacent to the main living space so the "cook" could share conversation with the family. It never was a passage from one space to another." This is one point of contention with my wife and I. She did not like Kentuck Knob's kitchen, mostly the fact that there was no windows and a space
to sit while cooking. We have both spoken about this feature of my design for hours (by the way, the corners of the kitchen, living room and office are supposed to me mitred corner windows, the software will just not do that function. It will be on my hand drawings later.) It is something I do intended to speak to the architect much more about (and the entrance). It is also, more or less, our own unique feature. We currently have what would be considered an eat in kitchen with both an eat at counter and 6 person dining table (no dining room in the house). And we know it is what we love about this house.
7) Roderick Grant said, "Now is the time to deal with generalities and to examine exactly how each interior space is to be used, and how much (or little) space is needed." As above, what I am doing with the plans is trying to communicate with my wife and family our needs. I dont know how many times she has said, "I cant picture what you are describing, can you draw it?" I do remember how much I hated as a software guy people giving me screen mockups without even knowing what their requirements of the system were, but it is how people think, visually. So I do ask patience with this side of this project, please. I do wish to share all of this experience, even this stage of it so that others can see what is involved. I actually do know others that are considering this and I think a sort of revival of this style home will eventually come about, especially with the baby-boomer generation.
Laurie said, "One of the characteristics of the Usonian houses, particularly the earliest, was the emphasis in the allocation of area to those spaces where the occupants were wide awake: those associated with living and dining. The areas of less activity, where folk were either bathing or somnolent, were small but adequate. " This is one thing we are learning and understanding more with our current space. We are reducing the amount of "things" and are really questioning "do we really need this? Is it in the right spot of the house? What if it was not there? What if we didnt have room to store it what would we do? We find ourselves doing this at other peoples homes as well. Something that helps us connect more with each other about what is coming.9) SDR's last comment regarding the hiring of an architect, I do fully agree with. I can design marketing campaigns that are so elegant for small and medium businesses that get results that a layman just cannot even hope to do as fast or on budget as I can. But it is almost always a hard sell to that same business. I do intend to hire the architect when the time comes. I have tried to contact a few of the ones recommended on a
preliminary basis and I will be dealing with Tim a bit more in the spring.
10) My last comment (sorry about the length of this post, I just want to address people's comments and sort of let you know my reasoning for certain things) is one thing I have realized more and more over time is the importance of the budget, materials, the plan and the ways to mitigate things. My wife keeps saying it could be a year before we even start, why are you putting so much thought into it? It is because I want to mitigate what seems to be the killer of most projects of this sort -- poor
planning and lack of knowledge of unknowns. For instance, some of the comments Tim Sutton told me, I would have never thought of myself. Certain situations come up you cannot predict or think of yourself. He told me about cutting the grid pattern in floor and not being able to reach where the line met the walls. The other is his design of a 2 slab foundation (one 'working' slab, then foam, then the finish slab). Or how he kept the heating lines from floating to the top of the slab (put the wire mess over the lines which solved two issues, spacing and floating). These are things I would have never learned without this process but want to learn and know before we even buy the land. I am also gaining a much deeper understanding of usonian design that I do not think I would have gotten just hiring an architect and throwing money at it. As someone said, the Jacobs home was an experience to them, not just a piece of paper to sign. I want that whole experience and then some. Again, I do thank everyone for the comments and directions. I am learning so much from each person and if I can return that favour for anyone, just let me know.
One has to admire the thoughtful dedication and thorough advanced planning that John is prepared to devote to his house project. Those are both essential ingredients.
In the above message there are two examples, I think, of placing the cart before the horse, however. In the first instance, spending considerable time with a digital sketch medium which doesn't contain certain ingredients which the client deems important to his project -- a planning grid, and the ability to sketch whatever window configuration he likes -- seems wasteful. More than that, to consider pencil drawing to be the appropriate final medium, and digital drawing to be the rough or temporary drawing mode, seems to reverse the usual and sensible course. I understand that roughing out and rearranging the initial design is done more quickly and easily on the screen than on the drawing board -- but still, at the very least the chosen program seems to leave something to be desired. Again, the grid isn't an afterthought -- if employed, it is on the sheet before anything else appears.
The other question I have is to wonder what functions John believes the architect plays, in the design and construction of a building. But I'll leave it to an architect to take up that matter.
SDR
In the above message there are two examples, I think, of placing the cart before the horse, however. In the first instance, spending considerable time with a digital sketch medium which doesn't contain certain ingredients which the client deems important to his project -- a planning grid, and the ability to sketch whatever window configuration he likes -- seems wasteful. More than that, to consider pencil drawing to be the appropriate final medium, and digital drawing to be the rough or temporary drawing mode, seems to reverse the usual and sensible course. I understand that roughing out and rearranging the initial design is done more quickly and easily on the screen than on the drawing board -- but still, at the very least the chosen program seems to leave something to be desired. Again, the grid isn't an afterthought -- if employed, it is on the sheet before anything else appears.
The other question I have is to wonder what functions John believes the architect plays, in the design and construction of a building. But I'll leave it to an architect to take up that matter.
SDR
Hang in there, John. Windsor farmland is indeed lacking in contour, and I'll bet one plot doesn't look too much different from the next plot. The sun, even in Canada, rises in the East, although I understand in some areas it actually sets in the Oest.
Your former neighbour (me - from Grosse Pointe) is cheering for you and hoping you ultimately do what you think is best for you, including sketching designs ahead of time.
Your former neighbour (me - from Grosse Pointe) is cheering for you and hoping you ultimately do what you think is best for you, including sketching designs ahead of time.
Thanks SDR and Jmcnally.
One thing my wife does tell me is I am more dedicated to my dreams than 99% of the people out there and it is the reason she fell in love with me. This project does extend to my own life as well. I describe it as my "magnificent obsession". It is what I do everything else for. I am now thinking in terms of how much we can get done on our new house instead of how much money do we need or websites do I have to design or ad campaigns I have to create to get it. In other words, it is a goal I direct my work to attain. I do understand FLW's thought processes in this regard. I can picture sitting in the living room each day looking out hugging my wife and feeling good it was something we achieved.
I will begin to draw on the grid system now. As I said, I have not received my Usonian book yet and perhaps do not understand the precepts needed yet. I am learning but there is not a class or site I can go to that says, "Here is how to build a usonian home". If there was, I'd be there and so would my wife. Or if someone even had a detailed checklist to follow, hey I'm there! But I have not found this. I am collecting pieces and winging my way through it.
My understanding of the role of an architect is primarily to take our requirements and turn them into an elegant design that meets our needs. It is also to be a bridge between us and the authorities on the matter of engineering and design.
Jmcnally, thanks for the encouragement. It is just my process. I don't think there is a perfect process, only ways to learn from your mistakes, refine, learn more and at some point you still have to "wing it". I love drawing the house with my wife and imagining it. But as a realist as well, I know at some point, only action begets results. I do see the importance of the grid now after looking at many designs and talking with people here. I didnt really "understand" that importance till recently or how to integrate it into my thought process. Grosse Pointe has some beautiful areas! I've lived in so many areas of Canada and US and I still keep coming back here and want to totally settle now. I didnt understand the farmland and the significance of it until I started along this path. My wife's family has taught us so much in that regards. Again, thanks.
One thing my wife does tell me is I am more dedicated to my dreams than 99% of the people out there and it is the reason she fell in love with me. This project does extend to my own life as well. I describe it as my "magnificent obsession". It is what I do everything else for. I am now thinking in terms of how much we can get done on our new house instead of how much money do we need or websites do I have to design or ad campaigns I have to create to get it. In other words, it is a goal I direct my work to attain. I do understand FLW's thought processes in this regard. I can picture sitting in the living room each day looking out hugging my wife and feeling good it was something we achieved.
I will begin to draw on the grid system now. As I said, I have not received my Usonian book yet and perhaps do not understand the precepts needed yet. I am learning but there is not a class or site I can go to that says, "Here is how to build a usonian home". If there was, I'd be there and so would my wife. Or if someone even had a detailed checklist to follow, hey I'm there! But I have not found this. I am collecting pieces and winging my way through it.
My understanding of the role of an architect is primarily to take our requirements and turn them into an elegant design that meets our needs. It is also to be a bridge between us and the authorities on the matter of engineering and design.
Jmcnally, thanks for the encouragement. It is just my process. I don't think there is a perfect process, only ways to learn from your mistakes, refine, learn more and at some point you still have to "wing it". I love drawing the house with my wife and imagining it. But as a realist as well, I know at some point, only action begets results. I do see the importance of the grid now after looking at many designs and talking with people here. I didnt really "understand" that importance till recently or how to integrate it into my thought process. Grosse Pointe has some beautiful areas! I've lived in so many areas of Canada and US and I still keep coming back here and want to totally settle now. I didnt understand the farmland and the significance of it until I started along this path. My wife's family has taught us so much in that regards. Again, thanks.
Twice in his life Mr Wright committed to paper a "recipe" -- or at least, a list of ingredients -- for a better house for the American family, as he saw (and built) it. In his sixties, in the Autobiography, he looked back at the first major period of his career and the so-called Prairie house, which he brought into being at the turn of the Twentieth Century. Here is what he wrote:
BUILDING THE NEW HOUSE
FIRST thing in building the new house, get rid of the attic, therefore the dormer. Get rid of the useless false heights below it. Next, get rid of the unwholesome basement, yes absolutely -- in any house built on the prairie. Instead of lean, brick chimneys bristling up everywhere to hint at Judgment, I could see necessity for one chimney only. A broad generous one, or at most two. These kept low-down on gently sloping roofs or perhaps fiat roofs. The big fireplace in the house below became now a place for a real fire. A real fireplace at that time was extraordinary. There were mantels instead. A mantel was a marble frame for a few coals in a grate. Or it was a piece of wooden furniture with tile stuck in it around the grate, the whole set slam up against the plastered, papered wall. Insult to comfort. So the integral fireplace became an important part of the building itself in the houses I was allowed to build out there on the prairie.
It comforted me to see the fire burning deep in the solid masonry of the house itself. A feeling that came to stay.
TAKING a human being for my scale, I brought the whole house down in height to fit a normal one -- ergo, 5' 8 1/2" tall, say. This is my own height. Believing in no other scale than the human being I broadened the mass out all I possibly could to bring it down into spaciousness. It has been said that were I three inches taller than 5' 8 1/2" all my houses would have been quite different in proportion. Probably.
House walls were now started at the ground on a cement or stone water table that looked like a low platform under the building, and usually was. But the house walls were stopped at the second-story windowsill level to let the bedrooms come through above in a continuous window series below the broad eaves of a gently sloping, overhanging roof. In this new house the wall was beginning to go as an impediment to outside light and air and beauty. Walls had been the great fact about the box in which holes had to be punched. It was still this conception of a wall-building which was with me when I designed the Winslow house. But after that my conception began to change.
My sense of "wall" was no longer the side of a box. It was enclosure of space affording protection against storm or heat only when needed. But it was also to bring the outside world into the house and let the inside of the house go outside. In this sense I was working away at the wall as a wall and bringing it towards the function of a screen, a means of opening up space which, as control of building-materials improved, would finally permit the free use of the whole space without affecting the soundness of the structure.
The climate being what it was, violent in extremes of heat and cold, damp and dry, dark and bright, I gave broad protecting roof-shelter to the whole, getting back to the purpose for which the cornice was originally designed. The underside of roof-projections was flat and usually light in color to create a glow of reflected light that softly brightened the upper rooms. Overhangs had double value: shelter and preservation for the walls of the house, as well as this diffusion of reflected light for the upper story through the "light screens" that took the place of the walls and were now often the windows in long series.
AND at this time I saw a house, primarily, as livable interior space under ample shelter. I like the sense of shelter in the look of a building. I still like it
The house began to associate with the ground and become natural to its prairie site.
AND would the young man in Architecture believe that this was all "new" then? Yes -- not only new, but destructive heresy -- ridiculous eccentricity. All somewhat so today. Stranger still, but then it was all so new that what prospect I had of ever earning a livelihood by making houses was nearly wrecked. At flrst, "they" called the houses "dress reform" houses because Society was just then excited about that particular reform. This simplification looked like some kind of reform to the provincials.
WHAT I have just described was on the outside of the house. But it was all there, chiefly because of what had happened inside.
Dwellings of that period were cut up, advisedly and completely, with the grim determination that should go with any cutting process. The interiors consisted of boxes beside boxes or inside boxes, called rooms. All boxes were inside a complicated outside boxing. Each domestic function was properly box to box.
I could see little sense in this inhibition, this cellular sequestration that implied ancestors familiar with penal institutions, except for the privacy of bedrooms on the upper floor. They were perhaps all right as sleeping boxes. So I declared the whole lower floor as one room, cutting off the kitchen as a laboratory, putting the servants' sleeping and living quarters next to the kitchen but semi-detached, on the ground floor. Then I screened various portions of the big room for certain domestic purposes like dining, reading, receiving callers.
There were no plans in existence like these at the time. But my clients were all pushed toward these ideas as helpful to a solution of the vexed servant problem. Scores of unnecessary doors disappeared and no end of partition. Both clients and servants liked the new freedom. The house became more free as space and morc livable too. Interior spaciousness began to dawn.
Thus came an end to the cluttered house. Fewer doors; fewer window holes though much greater window area; windows and doors lowered to convenient human heights. These changes once made, the ceilings of the rooms could be brought down over on to the walls by way of the horizontal broad bands of plaster on the walls themselves above the windows and colored the same as the room-ceilings. This would bring ceiling-surface and color down to the very window tops. Ceilings thus expanded by way of the wall band above the windows gave generous overhead even to small rooms. The sense of the whole broadened, made plastic by this means.
Here entered the important new element of plasticity -- as I saw it. And I saw it as indispensable element to the successful use of the machine. The windows would sometimes be wrapped around the building corners as inside emphasis of plasticity and to increase the sense of interior space. I fought for outswinging windows because the casement window associated house with the out-of-doors gave free openings outward. In other words, the so-called casement was not only simple but more human in use and effect. So more natural. If it had not existed I should have invented it. But it was not used at that time in the United States so I lost many clients because I insisted upon it. The client usually wanted the double-hung (the guillotine window) in use then, although it was neither simple nor human. It was only expedient. I used it once, in the Winslow house, and rejected it forever thereafter. Nor at that time did I entirely eliminate the wooden trim. I did make the "trim" plastic, that is to say, light and continuously flowing instead of the prevailing heavy "cut and butt" carpenter work. No longer did trim, so-called, look like carpenter work. The machine could do it all perfectly well as I laid it out, in this search for quiet. This plastic trim enabled poor workmanship to be concealed. There was need of that much trim then to conceal much in the way of craftsmanship because the battle between the machines and the Union had already begun to demoralize workmen.
Machine-resources of this period were so little understood that extensive drawings had to be made merely to show the mill-man what to leave off. Not alone in the trim but in numerous ways too tedious to describe in words, this revolutionary sense of the plastic whole began to work more and more intelligently and have fascinating unforeseen consequences. Nearly everyone had endured the house of the period as long as possible, judging by the appreciation of the change. Here was an ideal of organic simplicity put to work, with historical consequences not only in this country but especially in the thought of the civilized world.
________________________
3 typos edited
BUILDING THE NEW HOUSE
FIRST thing in building the new house, get rid of the attic, therefore the dormer. Get rid of the useless false heights below it. Next, get rid of the unwholesome basement, yes absolutely -- in any house built on the prairie. Instead of lean, brick chimneys bristling up everywhere to hint at Judgment, I could see necessity for one chimney only. A broad generous one, or at most two. These kept low-down on gently sloping roofs or perhaps fiat roofs. The big fireplace in the house below became now a place for a real fire. A real fireplace at that time was extraordinary. There were mantels instead. A mantel was a marble frame for a few coals in a grate. Or it was a piece of wooden furniture with tile stuck in it around the grate, the whole set slam up against the plastered, papered wall. Insult to comfort. So the integral fireplace became an important part of the building itself in the houses I was allowed to build out there on the prairie.
It comforted me to see the fire burning deep in the solid masonry of the house itself. A feeling that came to stay.
TAKING a human being for my scale, I brought the whole house down in height to fit a normal one -- ergo, 5' 8 1/2" tall, say. This is my own height. Believing in no other scale than the human being I broadened the mass out all I possibly could to bring it down into spaciousness. It has been said that were I three inches taller than 5' 8 1/2" all my houses would have been quite different in proportion. Probably.
House walls were now started at the ground on a cement or stone water table that looked like a low platform under the building, and usually was. But the house walls were stopped at the second-story windowsill level to let the bedrooms come through above in a continuous window series below the broad eaves of a gently sloping, overhanging roof. In this new house the wall was beginning to go as an impediment to outside light and air and beauty. Walls had been the great fact about the box in which holes had to be punched. It was still this conception of a wall-building which was with me when I designed the Winslow house. But after that my conception began to change.
My sense of "wall" was no longer the side of a box. It was enclosure of space affording protection against storm or heat only when needed. But it was also to bring the outside world into the house and let the inside of the house go outside. In this sense I was working away at the wall as a wall and bringing it towards the function of a screen, a means of opening up space which, as control of building-materials improved, would finally permit the free use of the whole space without affecting the soundness of the structure.
The climate being what it was, violent in extremes of heat and cold, damp and dry, dark and bright, I gave broad protecting roof-shelter to the whole, getting back to the purpose for which the cornice was originally designed. The underside of roof-projections was flat and usually light in color to create a glow of reflected light that softly brightened the upper rooms. Overhangs had double value: shelter and preservation for the walls of the house, as well as this diffusion of reflected light for the upper story through the "light screens" that took the place of the walls and were now often the windows in long series.
AND at this time I saw a house, primarily, as livable interior space under ample shelter. I like the sense of shelter in the look of a building. I still like it
The house began to associate with the ground and become natural to its prairie site.
AND would the young man in Architecture believe that this was all "new" then? Yes -- not only new, but destructive heresy -- ridiculous eccentricity. All somewhat so today. Stranger still, but then it was all so new that what prospect I had of ever earning a livelihood by making houses was nearly wrecked. At flrst, "they" called the houses "dress reform" houses because Society was just then excited about that particular reform. This simplification looked like some kind of reform to the provincials.
WHAT I have just described was on the outside of the house. But it was all there, chiefly because of what had happened inside.
Dwellings of that period were cut up, advisedly and completely, with the grim determination that should go with any cutting process. The interiors consisted of boxes beside boxes or inside boxes, called rooms. All boxes were inside a complicated outside boxing. Each domestic function was properly box to box.
I could see little sense in this inhibition, this cellular sequestration that implied ancestors familiar with penal institutions, except for the privacy of bedrooms on the upper floor. They were perhaps all right as sleeping boxes. So I declared the whole lower floor as one room, cutting off the kitchen as a laboratory, putting the servants' sleeping and living quarters next to the kitchen but semi-detached, on the ground floor. Then I screened various portions of the big room for certain domestic purposes like dining, reading, receiving callers.
There were no plans in existence like these at the time. But my clients were all pushed toward these ideas as helpful to a solution of the vexed servant problem. Scores of unnecessary doors disappeared and no end of partition. Both clients and servants liked the new freedom. The house became more free as space and morc livable too. Interior spaciousness began to dawn.
Thus came an end to the cluttered house. Fewer doors; fewer window holes though much greater window area; windows and doors lowered to convenient human heights. These changes once made, the ceilings of the rooms could be brought down over on to the walls by way of the horizontal broad bands of plaster on the walls themselves above the windows and colored the same as the room-ceilings. This would bring ceiling-surface and color down to the very window tops. Ceilings thus expanded by way of the wall band above the windows gave generous overhead even to small rooms. The sense of the whole broadened, made plastic by this means.
Here entered the important new element of plasticity -- as I saw it. And I saw it as indispensable element to the successful use of the machine. The windows would sometimes be wrapped around the building corners as inside emphasis of plasticity and to increase the sense of interior space. I fought for outswinging windows because the casement window associated house with the out-of-doors gave free openings outward. In other words, the so-called casement was not only simple but more human in use and effect. So more natural. If it had not existed I should have invented it. But it was not used at that time in the United States so I lost many clients because I insisted upon it. The client usually wanted the double-hung (the guillotine window) in use then, although it was neither simple nor human. It was only expedient. I used it once, in the Winslow house, and rejected it forever thereafter. Nor at that time did I entirely eliminate the wooden trim. I did make the "trim" plastic, that is to say, light and continuously flowing instead of the prevailing heavy "cut and butt" carpenter work. No longer did trim, so-called, look like carpenter work. The machine could do it all perfectly well as I laid it out, in this search for quiet. This plastic trim enabled poor workmanship to be concealed. There was need of that much trim then to conceal much in the way of craftsmanship because the battle between the machines and the Union had already begun to demoralize workmen.
Machine-resources of this period were so little understood that extensive drawings had to be made merely to show the mill-man what to leave off. Not alone in the trim but in numerous ways too tedious to describe in words, this revolutionary sense of the plastic whole began to work more and more intelligently and have fascinating unforeseen consequences. Nearly everyone had endured the house of the period as long as possible, judging by the appreciation of the change. Here was an ideal of organic simplicity put to work, with historical consequences not only in this country but especially in the thought of the civilized world.
________________________
3 typos edited
Last edited by SDR on Sat Nov 26, 2011 1:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It must be remembered that the original site for Jacobs I was one, single, 60' wide lot, where the floor-to-ceiling window wall in the Living Room would have faced both upslope and directly west into the setting sun. The house would also have butted up against the lot-lines on either side. It was only the latter problem that prompted Mr. and Mrs. Jacobs to purchase 2 lots across the street, which fortunately gave the living room an eastern exposure and sufficient setbacks on each side to allay a possible code violation.SDR wrote: Wright would be dismayed, or worse, to find someone copying (more or less) the plan of a house, without regard to the orientation, contours, climate and views of the site this new version would occupy. While there are differing opinions on how we should be inspired by Wright's work as we build for ourselves -- some, including me, favor the faithful replication of a chosen design, as one approach, while others (including Wright himself) insisted that others imbibe the spirit rather than the letter of that work -- all would agree with the architect that each project must begin with the land, its particular features and attributes, and that the design must grow from that unique set of realities.
SDR
Also, after Jack Howe began his own practice, one criticism that he leveled against Mr. Wright was the occasional lack of attention he (Wright) gave to the relationship between a particular design and its site.
Of course in a perfect world ... Wright, not the client, would have chosen the site.
To be clear, the two lots across the street were the ones the Jacobses built upon. It is interesting that this site provides a better orientation for the house Wright designed than would the one across the street -- though in neither case was the architect able to skew the house to best capture the sun, as he often did with later Usonians.
To continue the study of Mr Wright's published writings which actually describe what he had built ("What a man does, that he has . . ."), here is the second installment -- the "recipe" for the Usonian house, as published in The Natural House, when the architect was in his eighties and the work was going great guns. This portion of the book is illustrated with early photos of the first Jacobs house, and the passages are clearly meant to describe that structure.
It interests me to note that in both of these excerpts (the one above, and here), Wright is concerned in the main with the aesthetics and the material reality of his creations . . . as befits the man who was first and foremost an artist in architecture ?
Now what can be eliminated? These:
1. Visible roofs are expensive and unnecessary.
2. A garage is no longer necessary as cars are made. A carport will do, with liberal over-head shelter and walls on two sides. Detroit still has the livery-stable mind. It believes that the car is a horse and must be stabled.
1, The old-fashioned basement, except for a fuel and heater space, was always a plague spot. A steam-warmed concrete mat four inches thick laid directly on the ground over gravel filling, the walls set upon that, is better.
4. Interior "trim" is no longer necessary.
5. We need no radiators, no light fixtures. We will heat the house the "hypocaust" way--in or between the floors. We can make the wiring system itself be the light fixture, throwing light upon and down the ceiling. Light will thus be indirect, except for a few outlets for floor lamps.
6. Furniture, pictures and bric-a-brac are unnecessary because the walls can be made to include them or be them.
7. No painting at all. Wood best preserves itself. A coating of clear resinous oil would be enough. Only the floor mat of concrete squares needs waxing.
8. No plastering in the building.
9. No gutters, no downspouts.
To assist in general planning, what must or may we use in our new construction? In this case five materials: wood, brick, cement, paper, glass. To simplify fabrication we must use our horizontalunit system in construction. We must also use a vertical-unit system which will be the widths of the boards and batten-bands themselves, interlocking with the brick courses. Although it is getting to be a luxury material, the walls will be wood board-walls the same inside as outside--three thicknesses of boards with paper placed between them, the boards fastened together with screws. These slab-walls of boards--a kind of plywood construction on a large scale can be high in insulating value, vermin-proof, and practically fireproof. These walls like the fenestration may be prefabricated on the floor, with any degree of insulation we can afford, and raised into place, or they may be made at the mill and shipped to the site in sections. The roof can be built first on props and these walls shoved into place under them.
The appurtenance systems, to avoid cutting and complications, must be an organic part of construction but independent of the walls. Yes, we must have polished plate glass. It is one of the things we have at hand to gratify the designer of the truly modern house and bless its occupants.
The roof framing in this instance is laminated of three 2 x 4's in depth easily making the three offsets seen outside in the eaves of the roof, and enabling the roof span of 2 x 12/1 to be sufficiently pitched without the expense of "building up" the pitches. The middle offset may be left open at the eaves and fitted with flaps used to ventilate the roof spaces in summer. These 2 x 4's sheathed and insulated, then covered with a good asphalt roof, are the top of the house, shelter gratifying to the sense of shelter because of the generous eaves.
All this is in hand--no, it is in mind, as we plan the disposition of the rooms.
What must we consider essential now? We have a corner lot--say, an acre or two--with a south and west exposure? We will have a good garden. The house is planned to wrap around two sides of this garden.
1. We must have as big a living room with as much vista and garden coming in as we can afford, with a fireplace in it, and open bookshelves, a dining table in the alcove, benches, and living-room tables built in; a quiet rug on the floor.
2. Convenient cooking and dining space adjacent to not a part of the living room. This space may be set away from outside walls within the living area to make work easy. This is the new thought concerning a kitchen-to take it away from outside walls and let it turn up into overhead space within the chimney; thus connection to dining space is made immediate without unpleasant features and no outside wall space lost to the principal rooms. A natural current of air is thus set up toward the kitchen as toward a chimney, no cooking odors escaping back into the house. There are steps leading down from this space to a small cellar below for heater, fuel, and laundry, although no basement at all is necessary if the plan should be so made. The bathroom is usually next so that plumbing features of heating kitchen and bath may be economically combined.
3. In this case (two bedrooms and a workshop which may become a future bedroom) the single bathroom for the sake of privacy is not immediately connected to any single bedroom. Bathrooms opening directly into a bedroom occupied by more than one person or two bedrooms opening into a single bathroom have been badly overdone. We will have as much garden and space in all these space appropriations as our money allows after we have simplified construction by way of the technique we have tried out.
A modest house, this Usonian house, a dwelling place that has no feeling at all for the "grand" except as the house extends itself in the flat parallel to the ground. It will be a companion to the horizon. With floor-heating that kind of extension on the ground can hardly go too far for comfort or beauty of proportion, provided it does not cost too much in upkeep. As a matter of course a home like this is an architect's creation. It is not a builder's nor an amateur's effort. There is considerable risk in exposing the scheme to imitation or emulation.
This is true because a house of this type could not be well built and achieve its design except as an architect oversees the building.
And the building would fail of proper effect unless the furnishing and planting were all done by advice of the architect.
Thus briefly these few descriptive paragraphs together with the plan may help to indicate how stuffy and stifling the little colonial hot-boxes, hallowed by government or not, really are where Usonian family life is concerned. You might easily put two of them, each costing more, into the living space of this one and not go much outside the waHs. Here is a moderate-cost brick-and-wood house that by our new technology has been greatly extended both in scale and comfort: a single house suited to prefabrication because the factory can go to the house.
Imagine how the costs would come down were the technique a familiar matter or if many houses were to be executed at one time--probably down to forty-five hundred dollars, according to number built and location.
There is a freedom of movement, and a privacy too, afforded by the general arrangement here that is unknown to the current "boxment." Let us say nothing about beauty. Beauty is an ambiguous term concerning an affair of taste in the provinces of which our big cities are the largest.
But I think a cultured American, we say Usonian, housewife will look well in it. The now inevitable car will seem a part of it.
Where does the garden leave off and the house begin? Where the garden begins and the house leaves off.
Withal, this Usonian dwelling seems a thing loving the ground with the new sense of space, light, and freedom--to which our U.S.A. is entitled.
To continue the study of Mr Wright's published writings which actually describe what he had built ("What a man does, that he has . . ."), here is the second installment -- the "recipe" for the Usonian house, as published in The Natural House, when the architect was in his eighties and the work was going great guns. This portion of the book is illustrated with early photos of the first Jacobs house, and the passages are clearly meant to describe that structure.
It interests me to note that in both of these excerpts (the one above, and here), Wright is concerned in the main with the aesthetics and the material reality of his creations . . . as befits the man who was first and foremost an artist in architecture ?
Now what can be eliminated? These:
1. Visible roofs are expensive and unnecessary.
2. A garage is no longer necessary as cars are made. A carport will do, with liberal over-head shelter and walls on two sides. Detroit still has the livery-stable mind. It believes that the car is a horse and must be stabled.
1, The old-fashioned basement, except for a fuel and heater space, was always a plague spot. A steam-warmed concrete mat four inches thick laid directly on the ground over gravel filling, the walls set upon that, is better.
4. Interior "trim" is no longer necessary.
5. We need no radiators, no light fixtures. We will heat the house the "hypocaust" way--in or between the floors. We can make the wiring system itself be the light fixture, throwing light upon and down the ceiling. Light will thus be indirect, except for a few outlets for floor lamps.
6. Furniture, pictures and bric-a-brac are unnecessary because the walls can be made to include them or be them.
7. No painting at all. Wood best preserves itself. A coating of clear resinous oil would be enough. Only the floor mat of concrete squares needs waxing.
8. No plastering in the building.
9. No gutters, no downspouts.
To assist in general planning, what must or may we use in our new construction? In this case five materials: wood, brick, cement, paper, glass. To simplify fabrication we must use our horizontalunit system in construction. We must also use a vertical-unit system which will be the widths of the boards and batten-bands themselves, interlocking with the brick courses. Although it is getting to be a luxury material, the walls will be wood board-walls the same inside as outside--three thicknesses of boards with paper placed between them, the boards fastened together with screws. These slab-walls of boards--a kind of plywood construction on a large scale can be high in insulating value, vermin-proof, and practically fireproof. These walls like the fenestration may be prefabricated on the floor, with any degree of insulation we can afford, and raised into place, or they may be made at the mill and shipped to the site in sections. The roof can be built first on props and these walls shoved into place under them.
The appurtenance systems, to avoid cutting and complications, must be an organic part of construction but independent of the walls. Yes, we must have polished plate glass. It is one of the things we have at hand to gratify the designer of the truly modern house and bless its occupants.
The roof framing in this instance is laminated of three 2 x 4's in depth easily making the three offsets seen outside in the eaves of the roof, and enabling the roof span of 2 x 12/1 to be sufficiently pitched without the expense of "building up" the pitches. The middle offset may be left open at the eaves and fitted with flaps used to ventilate the roof spaces in summer. These 2 x 4's sheathed and insulated, then covered with a good asphalt roof, are the top of the house, shelter gratifying to the sense of shelter because of the generous eaves.
All this is in hand--no, it is in mind, as we plan the disposition of the rooms.
What must we consider essential now? We have a corner lot--say, an acre or two--with a south and west exposure? We will have a good garden. The house is planned to wrap around two sides of this garden.
1. We must have as big a living room with as much vista and garden coming in as we can afford, with a fireplace in it, and open bookshelves, a dining table in the alcove, benches, and living-room tables built in; a quiet rug on the floor.
2. Convenient cooking and dining space adjacent to not a part of the living room. This space may be set away from outside walls within the living area to make work easy. This is the new thought concerning a kitchen-to take it away from outside walls and let it turn up into overhead space within the chimney; thus connection to dining space is made immediate without unpleasant features and no outside wall space lost to the principal rooms. A natural current of air is thus set up toward the kitchen as toward a chimney, no cooking odors escaping back into the house. There are steps leading down from this space to a small cellar below for heater, fuel, and laundry, although no basement at all is necessary if the plan should be so made. The bathroom is usually next so that plumbing features of heating kitchen and bath may be economically combined.
3. In this case (two bedrooms and a workshop which may become a future bedroom) the single bathroom for the sake of privacy is not immediately connected to any single bedroom. Bathrooms opening directly into a bedroom occupied by more than one person or two bedrooms opening into a single bathroom have been badly overdone. We will have as much garden and space in all these space appropriations as our money allows after we have simplified construction by way of the technique we have tried out.
A modest house, this Usonian house, a dwelling place that has no feeling at all for the "grand" except as the house extends itself in the flat parallel to the ground. It will be a companion to the horizon. With floor-heating that kind of extension on the ground can hardly go too far for comfort or beauty of proportion, provided it does not cost too much in upkeep. As a matter of course a home like this is an architect's creation. It is not a builder's nor an amateur's effort. There is considerable risk in exposing the scheme to imitation or emulation.
This is true because a house of this type could not be well built and achieve its design except as an architect oversees the building.
And the building would fail of proper effect unless the furnishing and planting were all done by advice of the architect.
Thus briefly these few descriptive paragraphs together with the plan may help to indicate how stuffy and stifling the little colonial hot-boxes, hallowed by government or not, really are where Usonian family life is concerned. You might easily put two of them, each costing more, into the living space of this one and not go much outside the waHs. Here is a moderate-cost brick-and-wood house that by our new technology has been greatly extended both in scale and comfort: a single house suited to prefabrication because the factory can go to the house.
Imagine how the costs would come down were the technique a familiar matter or if many houses were to be executed at one time--probably down to forty-five hundred dollars, according to number built and location.
There is a freedom of movement, and a privacy too, afforded by the general arrangement here that is unknown to the current "boxment." Let us say nothing about beauty. Beauty is an ambiguous term concerning an affair of taste in the provinces of which our big cities are the largest.
But I think a cultured American, we say Usonian, housewife will look well in it. The now inevitable car will seem a part of it.
Where does the garden leave off and the house begin? Where the garden begins and the house leaves off.
Withal, this Usonian dwelling seems a thing loving the ground with the new sense of space, light, and freedom--to which our U.S.A. is entitled.