domus48

Given the recent coverage of this item it is hopeful that we can bring some muscle to bear on saving this significant architectural home. Thanks to "Ben H" for his additional efforts to bring attention to this via publication. That said, if anyone can assist or know of a means to assist (contacts in high places, historical information regarding the house or Robert Cohen, etc.) please feel free to contact me directly via this forum. Hopefully I will be in a position to present this home for consideration by the HAHC next month. We'll see. Time may run out on this but any effort is better none. Thanks!

"Just to summarize... What would the mod community like the current owner to do with the house, other than not tear it down?" Good question. The ideal situation would be that a buyer would purchase the home from Granit with the intent to preserve the home as a world-class, post-war home design. The odds of this scenario occurring are slim at best

"Does anyone think that this brand of 'architecture' will ever have defenders?" It will never have defenders or advocates... and it doesn't matter how much time elapses. It will always be poorly conceived, poorly designed and and unfortunate evolutionary branch. What's so disturbing about it is the total lack of substance or meaning. It merely exists as a place to house humans. Nothing more. I guess the real crime is that people consider this as a desirable condition... a higher attainment. And while it may serve as such, it is really only an embellished container with marketing image serving as substance. These sort of homes equate to nothing. Absolutely nothing. And the funny thing is... they never will. Ever.

"Hey, my house didn't pass your (or anyone else's) test either!" I'm not speaking for "flipper" but I realize the intent of the post is to convey the purely business end of the matter. Conservatively speaking (without any means to conduct a due diligence review other than in a limited empirical manner) I would say that 500K will be needed to properly restore this home -- that is a Conservative number as it said. Is there a buyer willing to spend that much once the purchase price is negotiated? Propably... just have to find that person. Easier said than done. "This house doesn't pass any tests any more. It should have been saved 2 years ago by its previous owner, a man who owns million dollar cars and would have been the perfect person to save it if he cared 1/10th as much about houses as he does cars." A question of priorities I guess. In this case, a misplaced priority. "I don't know what us as preservationists were supposed to do for the 2 years it sat empty." This is an topic in and of itself. "2 years ago when it was empty, RPS and I went there and he left his card just in case. If O'Quinn had called him and hired him as a realtor maybe we wouldn't be having this thread, who knows..." Too bad we can't get a hold of Mr. Peabody with his Way-back Machine, but we are at where we're at. So let's see what can be done now... is it too late? Maybe. But stirring things up on this home and preservation/un-checked development is better than snapping images of a demolished building. This one is calling out to us... question is, can you hear it?

What a terrific quote! Thanks for the Chronicle link. Anything anyone can produce -- documentation wise -- with respect to this house would be greatly appreciated.

"The current owner gives NO value to the structure. Trust me." Agreed... based on information I've received. I" haven't been inside it, but if it's 1/2 as nasty as I'm told, chances are it would cost as much to rehab it as he paid for the "lot". " A-n-d that would qualify for the 100% property tax break if the home was granted landmark status -- should those efforts be made with an agreeable owner. "As far as I know this was the most expensive "lot" ever purchased in Meyerland by a long shot and no one in their right mind would pay even more for it (so the current owner wouldn't have to take a loss), and THEN restore it." Granit Properties is the current owner (correct?) and they certainly possess deep pockets. Perhaps, they could actually do the right thing and save this property -- I know, what are the odds. But, there is a buyer out there for everything -- think ebay -- and real estate is no different... well, except it cost a lot more than used -- but still excellent condition -- Tupperware. "I think the communities' efforts are betted used to track down houses like this one that are in the state this one has been in for the last 5 years and rescue them from the owners before they become so neglected." Agreed... but what are the odds that will happen (probably about the same as efforts to save this one will be). Still, there are few houses as significant as this (as I see it) so it's worth a shot. Or we could spend our time discussing ad nauseum what color to paint our MCM front door. C'mon flipper, how about some support here.

Let's pull together to attempt to sway the owners position to demolish this masterpiece: A few years ago a Houston Chronicle piece was published concerning this house... does anyone on this forum possess a copy? Does anyone know of any period pieces written on this house -- certainly it was published. Gathering as much historical data would serve to bolster any attempt to save this extraordinary architectural work We cannot let this one fall by the wayside and simply vanish -- this home is truly a gem of post-war modern and easily holds it's own in the pantheon of Contemporary masterpieces.

I've secured the plans and will have them digitized and saved onto a disk. Unfortunately the packet of original drawings only contained plans -- no elevations, sections, details, etc. I will check with MCIA to see if they have additional material on this house. Otherwise we'll have to do with this. Plans are quite nicely drawn -- a bonus being the furniture plan.

"I still don't understand how they plan on tearing it down; the stacked stone walls look immovable." All buildings want to come down, we hold them in place forcefully (i.e. structure). Once the key support elements are knocked out... it's over. So it actually will likely not take much. I can't imagine that the current holder of the property will opt to renovate given what it would cost and the potential return. The ideal deal would be for an aficionado of high end mid-century modern to step up to the plate. Most of those folk seem to be in California.

Good news. I've made arrangements to secure the original construction plans for copying and scanning onto a disk. Photo documentation would be of much value as well (historic or contemporary) and hopefully someone will be able to step up to the plate on this.

Pick up a copy of "Contemporary: Architecture and interiors of the 1950's" by Lesley Jackson, Phaidon, 1994. N-e-x-t.

"Another poster mentioned the existence of construction documents... if these do indeed exist, they should be secured for copying or better yet, submission to a legitimate retainer of historic architectural documents..." The aforementioned item should be the focus of efforts to "record" this property for posterity. Do the construction documents exist? Can they be secured by someone on this panel? Finally, at a minimum the house's exterior should be photo documented.

What gave it away: The suggestion that multiple (tastefully executed) styles can co-exist or the use of the term "pastiche"?

Well, I will probably be whacked upside the head for what I'm about to write but that's the way it goes sometimes... I personally think there is legitimacy in both the Mediterranean amalgam/pastiche home forms and other less traditional home forms (i.e. post-war modern). Having said that, I do wholeheartedly agree that the destruction of significant and valid architecture forms* is not nor should it ever be considered as justifiable without an attempt at preservation -- at the very least a thorough evaluation of the potential to save the structure. Memorial Bend is currently being assaulted rather aggressively by developers. There are three new unoccupied homes (certainly qualifying as so called

I would like to urge those of you who may be on the fence with respect to applying for landmark status to attend this workshop. If you are aware of others who may not know of this forum but have mentioned that they are interested in the landmark designation, please apprise them of the upcoming workshop as well. There are misconceptions about the landmark designation as well as elegibility criteria and how to go about securing the status. This workshop will assist in clarifying these items and more. At the 50 year mark a given property possesses one of the significant criteria points and that factor alone aids considerably in the process. What that means is: Currently 1957 is the magic number. So if your house was built on or before that year, you've already made one of the criteria points. Residents of Memorial Bend, kindly note. Please plan to attend as Post-War Modern homes and the districts they abound in need recognition, protection and our collective aid in preserving Houston

The focus of the topic is 9602 Moollight Drive, as such perhaps we could remain focused on this item. I previously posted suggesting photo documentation efforts from someone who might be in a position to do such. This house will likely be demolished in the near future so whatever preservation efforts (be it documentation in this case) can be executed such needs to occur without delay. Or once again, we will have a posting of digital images of a demolished property -- what purpose this serves is beyond me -- and no lasting document of what once was. Another poster mentioned the existence of construction documents... if these do indeed exist, they should be secured for copying or better yet, submission to a legitimate retainer of historic architectural documents -- I see no reason whoever holds these documents that they would not be willing to assist in the desired goal. Also, some members have attempted to contact the current owner/developer --those efforts are certainly laudable (kudos to you) -- but we should consider this one a goner. The items noted above are realistic tasks and can be accomplished with a little effort. At least we would be able to say that something was achieved before the house disappeared forever. Who's stepping up to the plate?

I'm not sure how many times the point has to be made with respect to the new home construction types but it accomplishes little. Sure it's fun to lambaste the poor choices for replacements of significant architecture (be it post war or contemporary), but constructive activism toward an objective -- say, documentation of a significant structure, securing of existing plans, etc. -- would be far more beneficial than yet another critique of a "mcmansion". Just a thought.

Perhaps access could be granted for photo documentation. Unlike some of the other demolished structures in Houston, this is a significant piece of architecture -- regardless of period created. Perhaps Ben H would be in the position to preserve the memory of this edifice. It's a real shame this one is a goner.

See current issue of Metropolitan Home for interior images and text concerning the owners son/architect. Also, it's worth your effort to pick up issue 75 of "Tribeza". Pieces on Houston Mod, Stephen Fox and the cover story of the Herb Paseur designed Museum District home (very nice restoration efforts).

I'm not too sure about this encouragement to by a lot and build. If 250K is the desired expenditure, you're highly unlikely to be building in a desirable area. Figure $125 p.s.f. minimum for new construction -- on top of the lot cost. This number would of course exclude architectural fees. I would advise against a "contingency offer" (based on selling of one's house) as all leverage will be lost. Most likely the two mortgage scenario will be the game plan. There's risk... but then, when isn't there?

As I understand it, full disclosure with respect to flooding, fire, death within house, etc. is required by law. It would be unethical to do otherwise -- and probably create a potential liability issue. Regardless, any mention of flooding should put one on alert. High alert. Only those who have never been through one are naive enough to move forward on a real estate transaction within a flood zone. Sure, you can cite the fact that bayou improvements will probably reduce the risk of flooding but only just. As I have mentioned on another recent post: If it flooded once, it will flood again. Now, are there those who just accept the fact and live with it -- paying for flood insurance, dealing with the stress every time there's heavy rain, etc. You bet. I'm not one having been through it once. In my opinion, there simply is nothing out there (real estate wise) worth the risk and eventual stress of forced renovation as the result of flooding. If you've energy to spare and don't mind throwing away things you've treasured or worked hard to gain as a result of flooding... well, best of luck. You'll need it.

"On the other hand, the spectre of flooding would always be in the back of my mind. The realtor is waiting on a callback from the listing agent with more disclosure on the property." Be forewarned, if the house has flooded once it will flood again. And having had 4'-0" of water in my town home (also in the 100 year flood plain) I can assure you the impact on ones life is substantial. Coupled with increased insurance expense and as you mentioned, knowledge of the prospect of a flood

The loss of architecturally significant homes is without question, far reaching. Once removed, there is little to fill the void and worse still, little documentation of any real value. While photographs offer an immediate glimpse of what was, there is no context from which to understand or be edified by the architects concept. What is needed are floor plans. Unfortunately these take time (at least 20 hours of documentation and AutoCad input -- depending on size of property of course). It would be terrific if there was some sort of mechanism that would allow for field documentation of a structure prior to it's demolition. As previously stated, once gone... well, that's it. It's a real shame this one has been removed.