DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

Ladies' Mirror, Volume 2, Issue 9, 1 March 1924, Page 20

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

No. 2 by R. K. BINNEY, A.N.Z.I.A.

In this article Mr. Binney gives our readers some very valuable ideas, illustrated with photographs of actual houses suitable for erection in the Dominion. He has allowed The Ladies’ Mirror to reproduce the design of a small house which embodies many interesting features. There has been too much of the American bungalow type of house erected recently in New Zealand. This Dominion is the most English of all parts of the Empire. It therefore behoves ns to carry on the high traditions of our fathers by embodying in our houses English designs adapted to meet the exigencies of our climate. South Africa, which was founded as a Dutch Colony, has to this day developed an architecture of its own, founded on the farm house erected by the early Dutch settlers. Ladies’ Mirror.

THE necessity of economy has again come to the rescue of architecture, for changes have always been most marked at the times when the cost of building has shattered conventions. One can no longer hope that increased costs will be lower than they are at the present time. Another fact is the cost of the site. In certain suburbs, land is sold at a ridiculously high price, and after paying that price the cost of the land is out of proportion to the sum to he spent on the house. The necessity for economy lias brought the planning of a house to such a state that desire for or the glamour of quaintness and decorative features must be abandoned, and simplicity must be accepted whether we like it or not, unless inferior materials be used. The illustration of this bungalow is an example of simplicity. The. overhanging eaves, the correct proportion, the placing of windows and doors give a feeling of repose and coolness. The roof is of Italian tiles. These can now be bought in New Zealand, and when used in the proper manner give even the plainly designed building a decorative finish and at the same time they make an ideal roof for a climate as that of New Zealand. The plan of this bungalow is very simple. There is a long living room and a dining-room which overlook the garden, a servery, a well arranged kitchen and a maid's bedroom. The other wing contains two bedrooms, a dressing-room which can be used as an extra bedroom, and a bathroom. The approximate cost of this bungalow would be £1,500.

One of the most marked features of New Zealand domestic architecture is the free use of galvanised iron on roofs. There are cases when it is necessary for strict economy's sake to use this material, lint how often one sees "the pretentious house" with its fancy gables, ornate chimneys, oriel windows, gay leadlights, and the many elaborate pergolas, all crowned with a hideous iron roof, which gives the building the meanest appearance. In this climate, where the summers are long and warm, the most important points to be considered in domestic architecture should be coolness and shade. The money spent on embellishments would be far more wisely used on more suitable roof materials. Oriel windows, inglenooks and pergolas are all costly additions, even if they are desirable. Artistically they are not necessary, as good proportion and well balanced re lations of breadth, width, and height, give a feeling of repose and dignity. People in New Zealand do not realise the importance of a reposeful atmosphere about their homes. What can be more restful than a simply treated interior in neutral tones, a few well chosen pictures on the walls, and as little furniture as possible? However small and of low cost the house may be, good proportions are far more desirable than the ornate mansion that has missed these points, even though its walls be covered with costly pictures and its rooms crowded with expensive furniture. These advantages, with the relative lowness of cost and easy management, will outweigh the much exaggerated terror of house building.

This bungalow has been planned to include all the advantages, without the disadvantages of a flat, and to avoid long passages. It is approached through a forecourt, instead of the traditional front garden. This forecourt needs little upkeep, so that all the labour can be given to the garden at the back. It is built of weatherboards, and it has a tiled roof with a good overhang. The windows and frames are of steel. The principal bedroom has folding windows, which, when open, give the advantages of a sleeping porch; also each bedroom has windows on two walls for the provision of ventilation. There are ample linen cupboards in the bedroom lobby, and the servery is fitted with china cupboards. There is an incinerator and water heater, which supply the bathroom, servery and kitchen with hot water. The kitchen is well lighted and ventilated;' the recess gives room for the maid’s table. The hall, reception room and dining room are very simply treated; they are finished throughout with the same colouring. The principal rooms overlook the garden at the back and face the north. The approximate cost of this bungalow to-day would be about £1,400.

There can be little doubt that in the future all of us, except possibly a few, will be living in small houses. The growing burden of taxation and the shortage and difficulty of securing good domestic service and high wages are rendering the proper conduct of a large house an undesirable responsibility. It behoves us, therefore, to consider very carefully the question of the small house architecture. The illustration of this charming thatched cottage, although designed and built in England, is a proof that small houses or cottages need not be poky and ugly. They can have all the grace and good proportions of a larger and more expensive building. The entrance porch has been designed on a large scale, so that it serves a secondary purpose as a verandah. The exterior walls have been rendered with white painted plaster. The man who builds a house is putting so much money into an investment which may be disastrously bad; it depends on the nature of the house. A reasonably designed house in a reasonably good situation should always keep or more likely improve in value. A house for show, all features and no whole, is certain to depreciate in value.

here is a proverb which is often heard, “Fools build for wise men to live in. Most proverbs contain an element of solid worldly wisdom, most of them are at least half truths. But this saying has the distinction of being wholly silly. And yet, for some inexplicable reason, the notion that it is in the highest degree rash and unwise and foolhardy to build still haunts many minds. It deters those who need a house to live in from taking the obvious step of building the house they require, the house thev dream of. It hypnotises them into the belief that it is somehow wiser to buy an existing house, however unsuitable or inconvenient, and to alter it into habitableness. The mere fact that it should be necessary to undertake extensive alterations before an old house becomes habitable should alone suffice to demonstrate the wisdom of building to modern requirements. 1 he fact is that our proverb would be truer if we made a slight alteration, “Wise men build for fools to alter”the saving rings a little more sensibly. Many people who shrink from straightforward thinking are prepared to spend as much as it would cost them to build a new house in altering and reshaping an inconvenient old one. There are cases, of course, when alteration and adaptation are very much worth while. Some of the houses built 40 years ago, or even earlier, at the time of Bishop Selwyn, are eminently worth adapting to modern requirements. But the number of these solidly built and delightfully designed houses erected under the supervision of Bishop Selwyn are, alas! strictly limited, while

the number of existing dwellings that are dull or positively ugly is very great. And yet how many house-hunters prefer to spend pains and money in making one of these dull houses habitable, or at least less inconvenient, who lack the courage to build for themselves a new house that shall fulfil all their requirements, aesthetic as well as practical. An old house altered and converted can never be as convenient, as well adapted to modem needs, as a new one built. A man of average intelligence and not too eccentric tastes may always be. sure that the house which he has built for his own pleasure and convenience will he found convenient by others. Tastes vary, of course, and conditions change, but one can prophesy with a fair degree of certainty that a modern house of good design, a laboursaving house with adequate provision for the comfort of servants, will always remain a desirable residence. Taking all these into consideration, the wise man will prefer building to adapting. What are the features in these old houses that have to be altered? As a general rule, the inadequate things are the kitchen and servants’ quarters, but as often as not the houses are ugly, for their designers have striven to be quaint and original, and

have succeeded in being grotesque. Wise men build wisely for themselves to live in. . The architect is more likely to know what is aesthetically and economically sound than the amateur who desires to satisfy the whim of a moment. Taking all considerations, financial as well as aesthetic, into accountwhen building a house, having once passed the design, the safest thing to do is to leave the architect alone to do his business. It is always advisable to consult your architect, before completing the purchase of a site. Often difficulties in the way of building are overlooked, the subsoil for foundations and drainage may be found unsuitable. Trees and shrubs that may be on the site that would have helped in the design of the house have often been removed before the architect has been consulted. A house takes from six months to a year to build. A tree takes twenty years or more to grow. Therefore, if the trees on the site are ornamental, save them at all costs. Clients often have bought the land and decided on the type of plan and the arrangement of rooms before consulting the architect, who has to point out to them, to their great disappointment, that their idea of a house is unsuitable for the site. The kitchen would have faced a beautiful view, while the principal rooms and entrance would be exposed to the afternoon sun and prevailing winds. R. K. BINNEY.