GoAtomic Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 This is not meant to offend anyone, but this add-on .... well, you just have to see it. Check the back and front views too ...http://www.har.com/6471773Isn't the point of architecture to integrate things in an unobtrusive way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bach Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 This is not meant to offend anyone, but this add-on .... well, you just have to see it. Check the back and front views too ...http://www.har.com/6471773Isn't the point of architecture to integrate things in an unobtrusive way?Oh, my! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalparadise Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 Isn't the point of architecture to integrate things in an unobtrusive way?You mean, like this?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Guggenh...ilbao-jan05.jpgI agree with you that this Timbergrove house is pretty ugly, but I'm not sure you have "the point of architecture" completely nailed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marmer Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 From what I can see in these pictures, I don't have a problem with this at all. It looks like the new structure is at the back and somewhat screened by trees. It also looks like there was some care taken to choose appropriate materials, colors, and textures.I have seen other ranches with, in my opinion, much worse second stories added. And one really cool one in Southgate I'll have to find a picture of.marmer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marmer Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 You mean, like this?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Guggenh...ilbao-jan05.jpgI agree with you that this Timbergrove house is pretty ugly, but I'm not sure you have "the point of architecture" completely nailed.or this?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:JuedischesMuseum_2a.jpgor this?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Imperia...seumNorth01.jpgor even this?http://www.bartprince.com/mead.html#marmer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoAtomic Posted April 13, 2007 Author Share Posted April 13, 2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Guggenh...ilbao-jan05.jpgI agree with you that this Timbergrove house is pretty ugly, but I'm not sure you have "the point of architecture" completely nailed.I thought about that statement last night and I think that I misspoke about the intent of architecture. If what you were saying is that architecture should not always be unobtrusive, I agree; in fact it is often best when it's groundbreaking, daring and in your face. But in the Guggenheim example, the building is complete in that the WHOLE is startling and fresh, not just one piece of it. If you're going to attach an add-on structure to an existing house in a modest ranch house neighborhood, I would think 'good' architecture would dictate similar rooflines (not gable vs. the original hip), matching ground floor ceiling heights (not 10 ft. vs. 8 ft.) and brick that matches. I don't think that the add-on itself is poorly designed, it's just that it doesn't match. I'm not an architect, maybe I'm missing some creative point to this structure. But I know if that was my house and an architect had proposed this project, I would have shown them the door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 I'd hate to live next to that.A simple one story addition would have sufficed. This just looks silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway6 Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 I disagree with your original "architectural point" in reference to additions. There's nothing to say it has to be unobtrusive and look like it was originally there. If this were a one story addition, i can see the style and trying to match materials as making more sense... make it look like it was originally there. But if the owner wants a two story addition.. it obviously isnt going to be mistaken for being part of the original ranch home.. so why not have fun with it... I think this example is kinda bland and boring.. but i don't have a problem with it's existence. And who are you to say a 1 story addition would have sufficed ? You don't know what the owners needs or desires are... and if deed restrictions don't prohibit him from a 2 story addition..I say go at it. I rather have obtrusive and over-the-top next door than obtrusive and boring. Gehry Home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 What is the world is that trash you just posted?Those look like a favela in Rio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway6 Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 What is the world is that trash you just posted?Those look like a favela in Rio.It is a little much.. but i wouldnt call it trash.It's the home of the architect that did the musuem in post #3I'm guessing the property values of all the neighbors have skyrocketed being so close to Frank Gehry's home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orikal Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 We have a few of those two story additions in Oak Forest. A couple are really bad, and not hidden by trees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoAtomic Posted April 13, 2007 Author Share Posted April 13, 2007 And who are you to say a 1 story addition would have sufficed ?I never said that. I don't personally have a problem with a 2 story addition, I just think this one could have been done better. My opinion only, but I was curious to hear what others would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway6 Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 I never said that.I never said that you did say that.Coog did in post #7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 I just feel bad for the neighbors.What's funny is they are selling it as "just remodeled" which obviously includes the new addition.So you build the new addition and then sell? Nice.There is another two story addition in TG on Shirkmire that does a much better job of pulling this off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jersey01 Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 What is the world is that trash you just posted?Those look like a favela in Rio.I cannot believe I just read this. I've never heard that type of response to Frank Gehry. He is certainly not conventional, I'll give you that...but...wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalparadise Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 I cannot believe I just read this. I've never heard that type of response to Frank Gehry. He is certainly not conventional, I'll give you that...but...wow.You haven't listened to many responses to Gehry's work, then. Coog's take is identical to Gehry's LA neighbors' when this house was built.While we're talking about additions and museums and whether materials should match or the front and back should line-up -- what about our MFA? The two big additions -- one is connected above ground -- are very different from the original building. Are they both beautiful? It depends on your perspective.Do they detract from the neighborhood? No way.The old addition, which immitaded the classical stone portico with International Style wide-flange steel columns, was described by critics in Chicago as Mies' worst building ever...but the best building in Houston. I don't think they liked how the curve along Binz departed from similar square designs at IIT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 what makes it so pitiful, is that none of the original house is in the pics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.