Until 1980 I worked much of the time with a FLLW follower. However his built-in furniture was comfortable. Frankly I thought that many of his houses were not just good, but great. He was able to charge a fee of 18%. Many of his houses that I worked on were published. The plans worked and the details were worked out to the 1/16". WE drew full scale elevations of the kitchens and other important rooms. I worked on about 14 houses. It was fun, but harrowing. I really prefer commercial and municipal work. EDS
"Don" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news4.newsguy.com:
Oh, OK - I'd thought the sizes were off because of trimming. I stand corrected, thanks ;) I know about shrinkage when dealing with wood for things like furniture and other smaller-scale proejcts, but just assumed (erroniuosly, it turns out) that Lumber was differnt. It's always helpful to know the facts ;)
I definitely did not know that about pressure-treated wood. I thought they coated it with somethign but the salt bit is interesting.
Tangentially, I'll haev to google "how long does PT wood last if in contact with the ground", now that you've mentioned PT wood (I have a 2' wide perimeter of stones underlaid with fiberglass landscape fabric around the whole house and pool decking, to make insect control easier, but right now, all that's holding it up is that plastic 'lawn edging' stuff,a nd I'm trying to decide whetehr I want to make the maintenence even easier by putting something around the stone, since the lawn doods always end up knocking the stones in to the lawn).
I didn't know that - well that explains that. And why baseboards often don't seem to be flush at both the top and the botton. Interesting.
Which of course leads one to ask, How'd ya do it?" ;)
"EDS" wrote in news:y-ydnQyMaLCG4rLVnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:
[snip]
With older places, I think it might be that a lor of people just built their own shelters out of necessity, and simply dind't always know how to do it *well*.
In the end, for older structures (whetehr a house or a non-residential building), I think that each place is just individual, and any potantial buyer has to be sure to both (1) get a thorough inspection by someone who understands historic structures, and (2) be a hard realist about teh time and costs involved in restoration. Personally, I know I couldn't cope with an extensive restoration, having seen what can been involved, but of course different peopl eare different, and I also think it's very cool that other people do restore structures and, as a by-product, ina sense maintain that bit of history for the rest of us.
But going back to cosntruction quality, I think that mainly, the worst mistake is to *assume* that a structure is sound based upon its age (or newness). The thing is that, even if the building was well-built, factors ranging from perennial lack of maintenence, to poorly-done "renovations", to destructive inhabitants, will comprimise any structure. Plus, all builders simply were not, and are not, equal. So I don't think one can make accurate broad statements as to whether old is better or new is better...
"Don" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news1.newsguy.com:
I think he just needed to separate teh two examples into separate paragraphs - I think the point was to contrast the two odler places, one built poorly contrasted with one built well...
Now *that* is impressive.
I'm with you there. Whcih is why I hope that the last place I get will be custom - it wouldn't be large, but I would want it built well enough so that, when I can no longer do any maintenence work, it won't be a big deal because the place will remain sound.
"EDS" wrote in news:tMWdnT_oEoJWH7LVnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:
[snipped]
I'd like to see references to the publications, becasue I'd like to see that - if you don't want to post them here, you can send to (mirror image of) moc.niftorrapATscimorhcoretp
I think one thing that often is forgotten about FLW is that he did do a fari bit of experimentation. I'm not so sure thatit was, at that time, easy/straightforward to predict how some things would or wouldn't wrk, or stand the test of time. THat's just my impression, but it doesn't alter the fact that some of the ideas were, for lack of a better phrase, "human", in that they did try to address how people would feel in a particualr environment, based on the fact that poeple have a better quality of life (and also, do better work) if they're in a pleasing environment. Yeah, I knwo thre is more to it, but I'm talking about ideas that are worth taking to the next stage of development.
So, even if the cantilevered roof and balcony elements in Falling Water did need to be reinforced due to structural problems, the answer is not to simply NEVER use cantileverd roof and balcony elements; the answer is to use/adapt them where it is appropriate to do so, AND get the engineering correct.
So I don't go for either extreme (although all extreem\\ism is IMO too, well, extreme ;) ). I don't think FLW was a god, but I also don't think he was a villain or an inept boob. He was an architect who had some good ideas and some, well, not so good ideas - but at least his ideas make a person *think* ;)
"Don" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news1.newsguy.com:
Doesn't that comprimise the insulation of the room?
Isn't that why there is Faux Texturing?
Oh jeez, you do BIG projects! I figure the glass (and maybe some associated woodwork and concrete-molding) will be enough for me. Well, in addition to diggin in the yard and installing the rest of the stone borders. I'm more of a landscape type than a building type ;)
They seem to have doen it right in this house at least - all the baseboards, and pretty much anywhere that any sort of framing or other non-wall element meets the wall, is all caulked, with the caulk overall smoothed properly. SO I give them credit for that. The house in Massachusetts had no caulking, just paint, and the baseboards quickly started to "bow out" and develop gaps. Cheesy workmanship.
Have you ever seen metal baseboards, or metal-cald-woods ones? THat's an idea that's skittered around in my head off and on for a while, but I don't recall seeing it anywhere (aside from metal-framed heavy-duty industrial-type doors). I'm trying to picture how brushed stainless (or other metal) might look, whetehr it'd be interesting or whether it'd just look cheesy.
"Don" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news1.newsguy.com:
I see...
Well, that stinks :(
It's interesting to watch it done - very messy, i.e. kid-like ;)
I can't say I know anything useful about them. Well, I could say, but it'd be a lie, so I won't ;)
Did you get to set up that small portable greenhouse? What kind of vegetables?
I havent' seen too much aside from the very plain frames - occasionally, I've seen one that's stamped with a design, but most of the "metal" ones are faux finishes. Sometimes, they're silver-leaf, which is OK, if given a protective coat of varnish.
Oh yeah, that's true - I hadn't thought about scratching. THat's prob. why it's not used - it'd be like stainless appliances, a pita to keep up with. People would prob assume it was just wood painted with Rustoleum/enamel anyway.
I think it'd prob. have to be pressed/fitted onto a wooden form, othewise it'd dent too easily.
Well, seemed like a better idea than it actually is!
"Don" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news1.newsguy.com:
That's not too bad an amount for two people.
Well, from what I've read, smaller fruits/vegetables tend to be more nutritious, because the larger ones aer usually bread mainly for high sugar content, and fast growth - ironically, the faster the fruit/vegetable grows, the less the amount of minerals and whatnot that are taken up from the soil - it ends up being closer to leaves, in a sense, in that it's more water and cellulose. Which is why, for example, a lot of fruit these days does *not* tasete the way fruit did 30 yrs ago. Most consumers seem to be capable of only tasting "sweet", i.e. sugar, but when fruits are manipualted to increase the sugat content, it tends to bollox up the genes and/or development of actual *flavor*.
FWLIW...
That sounds good. COnsider a few stalks of corn, too. It does taste different when you gerow it, allow it to mature naturally, and eat it immediately after picking. You're also thinking of sunflowers IIRC...? Have you considered beans of any sort?
Oh yeah, I go in for flowering shrubs/small trees, too. Ideally, I'd like to have something blooming all year round (which is doable in the Houston area and other Southern climates).
THere is a good Redbud for hotter climates, IIRC the detailed designation is "Cercis canadensis var Oklahoma ssp 'texensis'"; I have one, it's a type that gets white floweres, it's in the 1/3 of the back yard that I've been turing into a WHite Garden (just because I've always liked the idea of that, being able to sit out on warm SOuthern nights an dsee the full moon lighting up the white flowers). I doubt we'll live here long enough to finish it, but the plan would be to first plant in a number of white- blooming shrubs and small trees, and tehn make beds underneath with various bulbs, perennials, and dwarf shrubs that bloom white. I should be getting my hands on some white-blooming Hibiscus this weekend. They're rare in the nursery trade so I had to special-order them.
Anyhoo, FWIW, of you wife likes crepe myrtles, trhere are now miniature ones that only grow to about 3'X3' and are suitable for growing in pots.
Salvia are also tough plants that can get from 2' to 6' (depending upon the type); penstemon i ssimilar. You can get all sorts of colors ranging from reds to purples to blues to white. I think there are also ao couple of yellows now, too. Typically, Salvia species are perennial and grow to thickly-shrubby plants about 4'X2'-4'. They attract butterflies, and on a hot day, give off a sage-like scent - they're related to the herb Sage. THey're generally what's called "woody perennials" - the stems are, well, woody, almost like a shrub, but they're not as bstantial as teh stems and branches of a true shrub. The few that are not perennial tend to reseed and come back the next year.
HTH!
Cool ;)
I haven't given too much thought to any sort of topiary because it's hard enough for me to keep up with low maintenence items, but alot of it is interesting.
"Don" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news1.newsguy.com:
Wow...
It's not too commone but it does happen that two will be able to grow that closely together.
In a way, it's a form of natural selection, although it selects for trees that retain enough leaves, and/or enough energy reserves, to survive a defoliation event. Most can come back for being completely denuded, although twice is harder (the problem with Gypsy Moths a few years back was that they'd come back again and again, devouring the young leaves until the tree was exhaused and died). But any sort fo environemtnal pressure is a form of selection. Even with the Texas BLuebonnets (basically, wild native lunpines) in my fron planting beds - the seeds that survive teh "Winter" (such as it is here) and grow quickly, and flower, before the heat hits (about this time of year) are the ones that survive and make next year's seeds. A lot of the seedlings that sprouted never quite made it. Anyone with a garden (who doesn't automaticly pull up, or otherwise kill, any and all seedlings) can easily observe the process. You'll see it with oyur trees - the ones that can grow quickly enough so as to escape the shade of he larger/older trees will survive, andthen have the chance to flower and set seed.
It cracks me up when I hear or read people say that "natural selection no longer occurs" - what a crock of nonsense.
Prob., like most people, brainwashed from the day of birth with all sorts of crap as to how things like social climbing and owning the maximum possible amount of miscellaneous stuff are supposedly of Paramount Importance and supposedly constitute The Meaning Of Life. It seems to me that this is why gurus, for example, have such an aura/mystique about them - to most people, even the simplest idea that ignores social bullshit and mindless materialism is a completely new and revolutionary idea.
One of the *advantages* of being socially "retarded" is that I never "properly" learned how to shut out perceptions, and appreciation, of the "stupid little things" like nature and the environment. When I learned about things like Eastern Philsophies, Zen koans, and the like, it was not a new thing, but an affirmation of mcuh that was, to me, patently obvious. What society totally sucks at is teaching children (and adults ;) ) how to *balance* the different aspects of human nature (or at least, the *capabilities* of human nature). We are social beings, and we are material beings existing in a material universe, but we're also intellectual beings, natural beings, emotional beings, and, dare I say it, spiritual, or at least philosophical, beings. Cultures in general tend to emphasize the social first, and the matrerial second, with the emotional nature third in importance, and the intellectual, natural, and spiritual/philosophical aspects being lumped together into a very, *very* VERY distant third.
This is, it seems to me, also why so many people totally reject a statement such as "nature can teach us a lot" - the call it "mystical claptrap", because they reejct the science behind it, and reject the non- social and non-material parts even of their own being. Meanwhile, I think this is also why it takes many people a very long time to recognize, and then start to develop, these other aspects of their being: they basically have to come across these things, learn about them, by accident - the culture offers not one iota of guidance, because the majority of sociocultural institutions, including religion, are completely and totally anthropocentric, to the extent that tehy actually seek to divide humans from nature, and designate nature as "evil". In reality, nature is often hostile, and fundamentally indifferent, but not "evil", which includes a premeditated intent to do harm.
What the heck is it with alt.architecture that people don't put anything in the subject or post any more?
This one, for instance, would have been so much more improved with
=2E.."of Fallingwater"
or in total
"That old half life engine thing again".
Has the same problem those games have for me. EVERYBODY IS RUNNING. Blows realism out the door. "The most realistic FPS to come down the pike since Crysislife 3..." and it I can do the mile in about twenty seconds.
Which is probably why FrankL provided a very short covered journey from car to entry.
You very seldom see a full tour of anything. Hell, even your semester final presentation on three boards had to edit.
"What is the big idea behind this design? What is the critical piece of interest?"
And they say Americans are growing up so "media savvy." pshaw.
It's Fallingwater. You've got one shot to present the outside and if you are lucky one shot to present the inside. Are you going to say "and here's the outside of the back wall which FLW used to anchor the focus towards the other side of the building"? "this is the sink"?
The next question is "if the back wall is used to focus away from itself why didn't you show what the focus is?" This is 101 stuff people.
Quick, without looking it up, where is Philip Johnson's guest house located in relation to the main Glass House? Had you ever bothered to care? To ask? Of course not. Big Idea.
gruhn wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com:
Media inundated. DIfferent from "savvy". From the French (IIRC) for "to know", "savvy" implies some level of comprehension of what it is that one is seeing.
Ah, but it's so much easier to criticise someone else's Big Idea, than it is to come up with an original one, esp. an original one tha twill make enough of an impact upon enough poeple so as to make on famous and rich.
"Sour grapes", phrase derived from one of Aesop's Tales (from, what, 3000 yrs ago?): if you can't achieve a goal, rahte than continuing to try and/or admitting one's own shortcomings, it's so very much easier to instead assuage one's ego by convincing oneself that the goal is tainted, and/or anyone else who achieve the goal was just an inept boob.
gruhn wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
Huh? What does that have to do with the etymology of the word "savvy" and the difference between "not really media savvy" (your implication) and soemone saying "right, not media savvy, merely media inundated, because 'savvy' means having knowledge about something? You might as well have written, "No, breadfruit", for all the relation it has to what you're quoting as the statement to which you're replying. Why quibble even when someone agrees with you?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.