Chahroudi / Massaro residence on Petre Island

[wjsaia]

Deleted.

[Roderick Grant]

Interior shots look better than I expected ... except, of course, for that stone and concrete work. The chunk of stone poking above the red concrete floor just looks ridiculous. But the skylight is quite impressive.

[KevinW]

I really cant get past that hideous stone finish construction. I think it just may look worse than thin brick veneer.

[Paul Ringstrom]

Since this home is on an island that is not accessible by car, and it is doubtful
that it will ever be available for viewing by the general public, I put together
107 of my recent photos of the completed house so that you can get the feeling that
you have been there: http://www.flickr.com/photos/45747476@N ... 619478267/

Click on VIEW SLIDESHOW in the upper right and then click on the middle of the
first photo to see the captions.

To those of you who are fixated that the stonework does not look like Taliesin West, I took the time to ask about it. This is what I learned: Joe Massaro wanted to emulate the stone and concrete walls of the Charoudi Cottage. These walls contain much more concrete than stone (unlike TW). Also since NY state has an energy code that must be met these walls have foam between the concrete facings so it was impossible to build the walls in the same manner that Wright did on the Cottage which was solid concrete with no insulation. The current look is driven by these factors and taking into consideration these facts is not as bad as some people on this forum seem to think.

The skylight in the lobby is indeed impressive and unique. There are small LED lights built into the perimeter of each of these triangles that results in a very impressive ambience after dark. This accent lighting is used extensively throughout the inside and outside of the house.

From a seated position you cannot see the island and it feels like you are on a boat.

[SDR]

Thanks, Paul. I appreciate the comprehensive tour.

A few comments: Nice woodwork -- and LOTS of it ! Good layout, apparently. Interesting movement into and through the house. Great living room and bed rooms. Magical location and siting. Not a misbegotten house at all, from what I see.

I would imagine that the copper fascia would come to life if the raised elements in the embossed pattern were masked and either textured or treated with a chemical, so as to achieve a slightly different tone.

The majority of the stone walls bother me mainly because they lack enough variety in the size and placement of stones. There is certainly little apparent similarity to the walls of the Cottage. . .

The stone wall in the master bedroom might serve as a model for some of the other concrete/stone surfaces: it appears like small pieces of stone have been laid, horizontally bedded, around the projecting stones. [Yet a third kind of stonework appears in the library (?)] Little by little, year by year, the concrete could be "filled" with smaller stone. . .?

I can't imagine using the L-shaped dining table. . .or the stone "counters" in the kitchen. More demo ? Triangular louvered wood lanterns or similar would make me happier than the metal ones presently separating the dining room form the living room.

I don't see the point of adding triangular surrounds to neatly-made circular recessed light fixtures -- except to mimic Wright ?

So glad to get a good look at the house at last.

SDR

[Paul Ringstrom]

Clarification: Joe Massaro told me that he is going to attach a clear piece of glass to the top of the stone (flush with the other countertops) to complete the work surfaces.

[Roderick Grant]

I agree that the stone wall in the master bedroom looks great. The only part of the entire house I still don't like is the masonry in the rest of the place. The stones are placed "on" the concrete, and are not "of" it. It could also have benefitted from a bit of editing; too much stone altogether. Overall, much better than I had imagined.

[dkottum]

Nice photos Paul, thanks. A great design on a spetacular site. There are some things that seem less than poetic. The stone treatment is a poor compromise, and should also be consistent throughout. I don't think Wright would have allowed the outdoor fireplace. The little man-made waterfall detracts from the spectacular natural site, as does the fountain in the pool. The firebrick overwhelms the fireplace masonry. The fabrics should be consistent on the built-ins.

This may seem nitpicking, but may be the difference between a nice house and a great house. I have to wonder if much of this was dictated by the client. One of the great things about Wright that kept the poetry in his designs from concept to completion was that he kept the client, no matter how rich or powerful, under his control. Remember those letters between him and Kaufman? The Johnson Wax story comes to mind as well, when Johnson said "At first he was working for me, then we were working together, and then I was working for him."

[SDR]

I imagine dkottum is right.

If the boat dock and stairs constitute the principal entry to the property -- or at least to the house -- the result seems a bit underwhelming, no ? The wall "fountain" seems more like a poorly-placed dog-watering convenience, relative to the scale of the house -- though photos can be deceiving.

Well, most of these defects, if that's what they are, *could* be corrected. . . I concur that the whole is better than I had feared.

SDR

[Paul Ringstrom]

here is a new article from New York Magazine:
http://nymag.com/homedesign/greatrooms/37252/

previously posted photo link from above: http://www.flickr.com/photos/45747476@N ... 619478267/

[pharding]

From the above article:

There are those who celebrate its realization: It’s used in the packaging of the Apple-based architecture software that helped bring the design to life and is the subject of an upcoming PBS documentary. And there are its haters: architects, scholars, and amateurs who say it’s not Wright’s real vision—the stones jut too much, the skylights should be flat, not domed, and so on. As it stands, the house is officially unofficial. The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation’s chief executive officer, Philip Allsopp, states bluntly, “It’s not a Frank Lloyd Wright house, because it hasn’t been certified by the foundation.�

....... In a telling side note, Allsopp put the Legacy program on hold last year.

Kudos to open debate on Wright Chat and the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation's courage to change direction. I believe that our voices have been heard.

[HOJO]

http://www.graphisoft.com/products/archicad/ac11/

[RJH]

Now that this Frank Lloyd Wright designed house is completed, does anyone know if the house will formally be photographed and published? I am not just talking about a newspaper article but a publication totally dedicated to this Frank Lloyd Wright designed house. I understand there is also a documentary done on building this Frank Lloyd Wright designed house. What is the status on this?

[JimM]

Frank Lloyd Wright Frank Lloyd Wright Frank Lloyd Wright

I thought Tom Heinz designed this house; Wright died 49 years ago.

[pharding]

I thought Tom Heinz designed this house; Wright died 49 years ago.

I could not agree more. That house is an ungainly mutt. RJH is the only person that attributes that dog to Frank Lloyd Wright.