DOI Heft:
No. 89 (July, 1904)
DOI Artikel:Week-end cottages, [2]: designs sent in for competition A. LV.
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.26962#0059
IKeek-Rnd Cottages
WEEK-END COTTAGES:
DESIGNS SENT IN FOR
COMPETITION A. LV*
Scott (May No., p. 327) and Johnnie send simple
plans which could be carried out at a reasonable
cost; but the flight of stairs shown by the latter
between the sitting room and the kitchen is uncom-
fortably steep. Limestone seems a designer of a
quite commendable energy, and submits no less
than four sets. They all have good points: No. 1
especially (p. 45) we think a thoughtful, compact,
and inexpensive plan, with simple elevations, natu-
rally treated, without disastrous affectation of pic-
turesqueness. This latter comes of itself, and can-
not be made to order. Of his No. 2 (p. 55) we would
say that his bedrooms have not sufficient height,
and there is an awkward valley timber under which
it is necessary to pass to get into the large bedroom.
No. 3 has a dark corner near the w.c., and, indeed,
his superficial area of lighting medium does not
comply with the usual local regulations. The
* The first article on this subject appeared in the May number ot
The Studio.
passage is only 2 ft. 6 in. wide, and again we have to
notice the omission of a vestibule door. In No. 4
the height of the living-room, which is barely
8 ft., wrould not be allowed. Autolocus sends more
than one stt. His contribution on p. 54 has good
points of planning and design, and is daintily
drawn. The drawing of Quex, on the other
hand, does not set out his design to the best
advantage. The servants’ w.c. out of the scul-
lery is an unpleasant feature, and there is no
headroom to the side door under the landing.
This latter defect also occurs in the case of Lyric
(p. 51), whose bedroom lighting once more is in-
sufficient, while Lochaber (May No., p. 328) has evi-
dently studied his bedroom question; but he also
has no vestibule door, and shows no “ offices,”
unless the unnamed room opening out of the
scullery is meant to serve this purpose. The head-
room, again, that Lap (May No., p. 331) shows to the
service between the living-room and kitchen is too
low, and Ferry (p. 57) has the same defect in his plan,
which shows barely 6 ft. under the stairs near the
kitchen. His coal-cellar, which leads out of the
scullery, is too small, as are his bedrooms. But‘he
STUDY FOR “THE GOLDEN FLEECE”
BY H. J. DRAPER
43
WEEK-END COTTAGES:
DESIGNS SENT IN FOR
COMPETITION A. LV*
Scott (May No., p. 327) and Johnnie send simple
plans which could be carried out at a reasonable
cost; but the flight of stairs shown by the latter
between the sitting room and the kitchen is uncom-
fortably steep. Limestone seems a designer of a
quite commendable energy, and submits no less
than four sets. They all have good points: No. 1
especially (p. 45) we think a thoughtful, compact,
and inexpensive plan, with simple elevations, natu-
rally treated, without disastrous affectation of pic-
turesqueness. This latter comes of itself, and can-
not be made to order. Of his No. 2 (p. 55) we would
say that his bedrooms have not sufficient height,
and there is an awkward valley timber under which
it is necessary to pass to get into the large bedroom.
No. 3 has a dark corner near the w.c., and, indeed,
his superficial area of lighting medium does not
comply with the usual local regulations. The
* The first article on this subject appeared in the May number ot
The Studio.
passage is only 2 ft. 6 in. wide, and again we have to
notice the omission of a vestibule door. In No. 4
the height of the living-room, which is barely
8 ft., wrould not be allowed. Autolocus sends more
than one stt. His contribution on p. 54 has good
points of planning and design, and is daintily
drawn. The drawing of Quex, on the other
hand, does not set out his design to the best
advantage. The servants’ w.c. out of the scul-
lery is an unpleasant feature, and there is no
headroom to the side door under the landing.
This latter defect also occurs in the case of Lyric
(p. 51), whose bedroom lighting once more is in-
sufficient, while Lochaber (May No., p. 328) has evi-
dently studied his bedroom question; but he also
has no vestibule door, and shows no “ offices,”
unless the unnamed room opening out of the
scullery is meant to serve this purpose. The head-
room, again, that Lap (May No., p. 331) shows to the
service between the living-room and kitchen is too
low, and Ferry (p. 57) has the same defect in his plan,
which shows barely 6 ft. under the stairs near the
kitchen. His coal-cellar, which leads out of the
scullery, is too small, as are his bedrooms. But‘he
STUDY FOR “THE GOLDEN FLEECE”
BY H. J. DRAPER
43