Greetings to All:
Announcing the trip of the YEAR!...maybe the trip of the decade!! Auldbrass Plantation, designed by Frank Lloyd Wright-opened in 1941 & located just outside of the small town of Yemassee, South Carolina, about an hour north of Savannah, Georgia, is opening its doors on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, November 7-9, 2015 to the general public for guided & self-guided tours by its owner, movie producer, Joel Silver. His 326 acre plantation/estate has been in the restoration stages for the last 15 years under Silver's guidance & meticulous effort-it’s comparable to what he has done on the 'big screen', budget wise. The cost is $110.00 per person & this announcement is to gather all those who are interested in going up for this tour. Each day, they will open the doors to the estate @ 10:00 am, and close the plantation @ 4:00 pm. There is an additional cost for lunch, but we can coordinate that once our list has been completed. The Friday tour is for groups & we are shooting for this date, as well [we need a minimum of 15]. The plan would be for those making the 'passage' to Auldbrass, to either leave the night before, or early Friday morning [it’s about a 5 hour drive from Orlando, Florida] to attend the afternoon tour. Sign up deadline for this trip will be Monday, 10 August 2015-midnight. Please contact Jerry Uhran if you are interested about making this trip up to South Carolina.
Phone Number/Text: 407.616.7202
Email Address: [email protected]
Jerry
Auldbrass Tour
Auldbrass Tour
In today's mailbox:
ch
Back in February, I heard a rumor that the plantation would be hosting public tours later in the year and contacted them. At that time, they said that the tour would be in November and that the information would be sent out to interested parties "in late spring". I suspect this is that ...
AULDBRASS TOUR
AULDBRASS TOUR
Last edited by SREcklund on Thu Jul 02, 2015 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
For more than a few years now, the Beaufort County, SC - Open Land Trust has been holding tours of Auldbrass Plantation every other year, in November. I believe this is the agreement they reached with Joel Silver some time ago for public access to the site.
My wife and I have been on these tours twice now, the first time being around 10 or so years ago.
David
My wife and I have been on these tours twice now, the first time being around 10 or so years ago.
David
-
Roderick Grant
- Posts: 11815
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
The public access was part of the purchase agreement in 1986. At that time, Beaufort County owned the property, but could not afford to restore or maintain it, so Joel bought it for $100K and the agreement to open it to the public every other November. Along the way, he has spent at least $30M restoring the buildings, expanding the property and dredging the swamp, and is now finally preparing to construct the intended, but not executed, 8-bedroom guest house.
-
Roderick Grant
- Posts: 11815
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
Freeman is so problematic, even beyond the stability of the structure, which USC has highlighted by making new blocks markedly different in hue from original blocks, as if that's somehow meaningful.
How should it be 'restored'? Is FLW the one designer whose work should be honored? Or should RMS's major remodeling of living room furnishings, the roof fascia attaching the garage and house, west half of lower level into a retreat for Sam after the divorce, and enclosure of the downstairs hall, loggia and laundry under the garage into an apartment be considered? Or Lautner's replacement of redwood fenestration in the corner windows with painted aluminum? Or Bob Clark's complete '50s remodeling of the kitchen?
Use, other than as a private residence, is questionable. If the Ennis neighbors have a problem with visitors, Freeman neighbors, with that narrow, winding, steep street and no parking, would go postal.
The neighborhood is especially troublesome. Freeman is at the eastern edge of a high-end development of the 1920s, but just beyond that boundary line, the quality of the area dips dramatically. North of the property, starting at Highland Avenue, is an old, ramshackle hotel that climbs the hill all the way up to Glencoe, giving access to an unending stream of drunk and drug-addled types, one of whom, in the '80s, tied up Harriett and her caretaker as he rummaged through the house looking for anything of value to sell for a fix. A public stair leads up from Highland past three land-locked properties (including RMS's splendid DeKeyser Duplex) ending at the Freeman terrace outside the apartment, so public access is unavoidable right up to the back door. The splendid city view seen in Julius Schulman's iconic photo (cover of Taschen #2) looks out over a huge parking lot. Highland Avenue wraps around the base of the hill, funneling major traffic north to the Hollywood Bowl and the 101 Freeway.
All of those problems auger ill for a successful future. The house is too small to serve as a family residence, and too modest overall to entice anyone wealthy enough to make the effort profitable. The restoration would cost a bundle of money with no prospect of profit or even coming close to break-even. Philanthropies operate using a business model, whereby the major consideration is the continued existence of the institution above the end product of the largesse. To wit, as has been noted, the Gamble House is well taken care of by the same institution that owns Freeman because there is profit to be made.
How should it be 'restored'? Is FLW the one designer whose work should be honored? Or should RMS's major remodeling of living room furnishings, the roof fascia attaching the garage and house, west half of lower level into a retreat for Sam after the divorce, and enclosure of the downstairs hall, loggia and laundry under the garage into an apartment be considered? Or Lautner's replacement of redwood fenestration in the corner windows with painted aluminum? Or Bob Clark's complete '50s remodeling of the kitchen?
Use, other than as a private residence, is questionable. If the Ennis neighbors have a problem with visitors, Freeman neighbors, with that narrow, winding, steep street and no parking, would go postal.
The neighborhood is especially troublesome. Freeman is at the eastern edge of a high-end development of the 1920s, but just beyond that boundary line, the quality of the area dips dramatically. North of the property, starting at Highland Avenue, is an old, ramshackle hotel that climbs the hill all the way up to Glencoe, giving access to an unending stream of drunk and drug-addled types, one of whom, in the '80s, tied up Harriett and her caretaker as he rummaged through the house looking for anything of value to sell for a fix. A public stair leads up from Highland past three land-locked properties (including RMS's splendid DeKeyser Duplex) ending at the Freeman terrace outside the apartment, so public access is unavoidable right up to the back door. The splendid city view seen in Julius Schulman's iconic photo (cover of Taschen #2) looks out over a huge parking lot. Highland Avenue wraps around the base of the hill, funneling major traffic north to the Hollywood Bowl and the 101 Freeway.
All of those problems auger ill for a successful future. The house is too small to serve as a family residence, and too modest overall to entice anyone wealthy enough to make the effort profitable. The restoration would cost a bundle of money with no prospect of profit or even coming close to break-even. Philanthropies operate using a business model, whereby the major consideration is the continued existence of the institution above the end product of the largesse. To wit, as has been noted, the Gamble House is well taken care of by the same institution that owns Freeman because there is profit to be made.
I just don't want to read in the LA Times some morning in the near future that the house is now a pile of rubble in the aforementioned parking lot ...Roderick Grant wrote:Freeman is so problematic, even beyond the stability of the structure, which USC has highlighted by making new blocks markedly different in hue from original blocks, as if that's somehow meaningful.
How should it be 'restored'? Is FLW the one designer whose work should be honored? Or should RMS's major remodeling of living room furnishings, the roof fascia attaching the garage and house, west half of lower level into a retreat for Sam after the divorce, and enclosure of the downstairs hall, loggia and laundry under the garage into an apartment be considered? Or Lautner's replacement of redwood fenestration in the corner windows with painted aluminum? Or Bob Clark's complete '50s remodeling of the kitchen?
Use, other than as a private residence, is questionable. If the Ennis neighbors have a problem with visitors, Freeman neighbors, with that narrow, winding, steep street and no parking, would go postal.
The neighborhood is especially troublesome. Freeman is at the eastern edge of a high-end development of the 1920s, but just beyond that boundary line, the quality of the area dips dramatically. North of the property, starting at Highland Avenue, is an old, ramshackle hotel that climbs the hill all the way up to Glencoe, giving access to an unending stream of drunk and drug-addled types, one of whom, in the '80s, tied up Harriett and her caretaker as he rummaged through the house looking for anything of value to sell for a fix. A public stair leads up from Highland past three land-locked properties (including RMS's splendid DeKeyser Duplex) ending at the Freeman terrace outside the apartment, so public access is unavoidable right up to the back door. The splendid city view seen in Julius Schulman's iconic photo (cover of Taschen #2) looks out over a huge parking lot. Highland Avenue wraps around the base of the hill, funneling major traffic north to the Hollywood Bowl and the 101 Freeway.
All of those problems auger ill for a successful future. The house is too small to serve as a family residence, and too modest overall to entice anyone wealthy enough to make the effort profitable. The restoration would cost a bundle of money with no prospect of profit or even coming close to break-even. Philanthropies operate using a business model, whereby the major consideration is the continued existence of the institution above the end product of the largesse. To wit, as has been noted, the Gamble House is well taken care of by the same institution that owns Freeman because there is profit to be made.
To those who wonder why anyone would propose the replication of a famous structure on a second building site, Freeman presents a powerful argument -- as I see it. The original context has changed to the extent that the building, itself compromised in its fabric, is literally and figuratively unviable as either a modern residence or a monument available to the public.
Conservation of the extant structure is the obvious and inarguable first order of business. Those with a more expansive definition of historic preservation might be willing to entertain the concept of "second life" for an historic masterpiece, in the form of an alternate site -- something the architect himself might not dismiss as an option considering the number of times he proposed a second and a third site for a favorite design idea.
I am well aware of my "outsider" status in the world of Wright studies; I can only hope that I'm worthy of consideration somewhere in the range between "Out of the mouths of babes" and "Fools rush in" . . . !
SDR
Conservation of the extant structure is the obvious and inarguable first order of business. Those with a more expansive definition of historic preservation might be willing to entertain the concept of "second life" for an historic masterpiece, in the form of an alternate site -- something the architect himself might not dismiss as an option considering the number of times he proposed a second and a third site for a favorite design idea.
I am well aware of my "outsider" status in the world of Wright studies; I can only hope that I'm worthy of consideration somewhere in the range between "Out of the mouths of babes" and "Fools rush in" . . . !
SDR
My point would be that the house is, essentially, already lost. That is, the structure and the skin have both been compromised, and (more importantly ?) the house can be enjoyed neither as a residence nor as an object of contemplation by visitors.
The question would become, is a replica the right receptacle for bits and pieces of the original house, or should the reconstruction be made of whole cloth, while the original remains in place ? With the creation of a "second site" for the design, two versions of the design could become extant simultaneously; in the case of Freeman, one house (the original ?) might contain all of the modifications cited by Roderick above, while the newly-built one could represent the unaltered version of the design.
SDR
The question would become, is a replica the right receptacle for bits and pieces of the original house, or should the reconstruction be made of whole cloth, while the original remains in place ? With the creation of a "second site" for the design, two versions of the design could become extant simultaneously; in the case of Freeman, one house (the original ?) might contain all of the modifications cited by Roderick above, while the newly-built one could represent the unaltered version of the design.
SDR
-
Roderick Grant
- Posts: 11815
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
SDR, I would have no problem with a doppelganger. It would be hard and expensive to find a site as perfect for the design as the original, but it could be done with enough money. There were lots above Storer that might have worked, but I think all of them have been developed by now. Some of the construction problems could be solved in ways that worked for Storer, which was built at the same time, but has never had the structural problems of too-soft blocks or corroded rebar. Because of the limited budget the Freemans had, by the time construction was finished, there was only one person, an 18-year-old high school senior, working on the building. Once done, Sam and Harriett altered whatever they wanted without FLW's involvement, which took things way too far from the original intent. It seemed doomed from the get-go.
To me, the genius of the place was on paper. The realization of the design had problems that should not have happened, so doing it correctly from start to finish could be a type of restoration. I would even include the "pews" that originally flanked the living room fireplace.
RMS was a great architect, but his additions and alterations at Freeman confuse visitors, who are apt to assume FLW was responsible. So I would not include them, especially the downstairs reconfiguration of the bedrooms and study.
As Fran Warren sang, ".... but I can dream, can't I?"
To me, the genius of the place was on paper. The realization of the design had problems that should not have happened, so doing it correctly from start to finish could be a type of restoration. I would even include the "pews" that originally flanked the living room fireplace.
RMS was a great architect, but his additions and alterations at Freeman confuse visitors, who are apt to assume FLW was responsible. So I would not include them, especially the downstairs reconfiguration of the bedrooms and study.
As Fran Warren sang, ".... but I can dream, can't I?"