Page 1 of 4

Greenberg House, Wisconsin

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 9:59 am
by outside in
The owners of the Greenberg House have decided to complete the home as designed by Wright in 1954. Maurice Greenberg was unable to complete the house, but had the foresight to order enough brick to finish. The living room roof extends over the space with no visible means of support at the balcony wall. The lower roof is actually hung from steel beams founded in the high ceiling - I've never seen anything quite like it.
Image
Image
Image
Image
Luckily we had a warm fall and early winter, allowing the foundations to be poured. Floor slab and framing will begin in late March, weather permitting!
Image

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:13 am
by DavidC
That is fantastic, John! . Thanks for sharing this with us.

Will the room layout in the new wing be the same as in the original plans, too?


David

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:54 am
by SDR
Wow. An impressive project (and a delightful plan). It will be fun to watch this one.

The first photo certainly does present a head-scratcher. If the lower roof is hung from the upper one, what (one wonders) supports the upper one ? And (incidentally) what is the bit of "flue pipe" visible just outside the upper glass ?

Can't wait for more. Keep up the good work(s) !

SDR

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:10 am
by outside in
the upper roof contains steel beams that rest on the masonry elements shown on the plan - they cantilever out to the clerestories, and then steel rods extend between the sash to support a header below. The living room and balcony themselves are cantilevered as well. Very precarious.

the large pipe you see in the photo was a temporary method of removing water from the upper roof. Its now been removed.

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:24 am
by SDR
Wow. Thanks. The slight-of-hand routinely performed at Taliesin does boggle the mind, doesn't it. The resulting effect -- slender verticals and hefty, generous horizontals -- is worth it, every time, it seems. One is not invited to explore (or even notice) the machinations necessary for the effect. "Don't look behind the curtain -- nothing to see here !" The Wizard of Spring Green . . .

Gotta love that parapet-raising metalwork. Wonder when that appeared. The rings seem to have a life of their own, spinning willy-nilly ? One does find, again and again, surprisingly low parapets at Wright's decks and terraces. How do the ones at Fallingwater feel, to the visitor ?

SDR

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:27 am
by Macrodex
The plan of that house reminds me a lot of Goetsch-Winkler II.

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:44 am
by outside in
A better view of the expanse of glass in the living room, with an enlargement of the framing drawing illustrating the steel in the upper roof. I particularly like the "teeter totter" steel at the chimney, to the left.
Image
Image

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:55 am
by DRN
A great and exciting project to say the least.
Please keep us updated with photos as time and weather allow; I'd be very interested in seeing the process of placing and finishing the red tinted slab.

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:59 pm
by peterm
Thanks for sharing this, outside in... It looks like it will be amazing when completed.

What is going on with the circular detail on the metal railing? In this photo it looks like it gradually shifts from perpendicular to parallel. Is there some sort of pattern there?

Image

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:08 pm
by outside in
the rings and rail are a temporary solution to the low balcony wall - code says 36 inches high, built at 30. Low on the priority list right now.........

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:36 pm
by Roderick Grant
30" is enough. Couldn't the 30" height be grandfathered in? Ex post facto says you can't apply laws retroactively. When was the code requirement written?

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:39 pm
by outside in
perhaps Roderick, we're not sure - of course it would be better without it, but the owner worries about losing someone off the edge, which I completely understand. State of Wis. tends to be over the top with these things. Wasn't the closing of the research tower at Johnson Wax due to building code exiting requirements?

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:37 pm
by Roderick Grant
I believe the code that existed when Johnson was built required two fire stairs, so what is odd is that it was allowed to be built at all. Mark Hertzberg, didn't you just address that situation recently?

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:18 pm
by Paul Ringstrom
outside in,
When do you anticipate that this project will be completed? 2013? 2014?

the owner of this house has a business that makes vintage TVs that look like they are from the 50s and 60s and would be appropriate in the Jetson's House. They all have new technology in them (not the old tube-type pre-transistor era). I don't remember his website where he sells them. Maybe someone else can contribute.

A few years ago he built a free standing Usonian-esque building on the property that he used for his business. I think outside in was involved in that project too.

Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:49 pm
by jmcnally
for those keeping score at home, this is S.372.