Solving Problems #1

I said before that the plans and elevations from the Wendingen don't really match up, and I found an example today. I started working on the second floor of the Belvedere and, when I measured it from the section, found that it was only about 6'-0" high. This is remarkably low, even for Wright. While he was fond of low ceilings and even lower doors, I can't think of any examples of buildings where the ceiling of an entire room was that low (not that I'm a Wright expert). At his own home and studio in Oak Park, the hallway is very narrow and short, but the rooms themselves are comfortable. Being over 6' tall myself, I simply can't imagine going to a public building, even in 1914, and finding that I am taller than the ceilings.

However, upon further examination, I think the 6'-0" height is a mistake for two reasons. First, if you look at the section, there is an archway beyond. This archway is drawn so that it clearly overlaps the ceiling. It seems impossible that this is correct and I think it may just be a drafting error. The second reason is the more telling. I took the exterior elevation of the Belvedere and, in AutoCAD, drew in the second floor. I know that the tall narrow windows in the Belvedere go all the way up to the second floor ceiling, and when I measured from my drawn-in floor to the top of the window, I ended up with a whole foot more. Thus, the second floor of the belvedere is going to have a 7'-0" ceiling. I don't know how this is going to affect things in the second floor promenade, but that is something I will have to deal with later.

While this may not be a problem, I had an interesting discovery while working on the model. I was taking the patterned walls on the upper portion of the Belvedere back into the corner and found that they intersected at the interior column. You can see what I'm talking about here:



At first I was bummed because I felt I'd made a mistake, but now I don't think that I did. I went and looked back at all the photos I have that show this corner condition, and none of them were helpful. This is because there is another element that is located at the corner and puts what I'm showing into shadow (sorry if this isn't making sense, but if you look at the pictures I think you can follow).



The reason I don't think it's a mistake is because of the Wendingen drawings. If you look at both the plans and elevations, the columns would extend past that corner. It is also a good structural solution. What really surprised me, though, is that the pattern of the decorative blocks exactly ends at the column on both sides. I didn't plan that, it just happened.

I haven't ruled out the notion that the column may have been cut back at the corner, but for now I'm going to leave it the way it is. I kind of like the interpenetration of forms.