Our Twenty-first Competition for a Seaside Bungalow

Progress, Volume IX, Issue 10, 1 June 1914, Page 1116

Our Twenty-first Competition for a Seaside Bungalow

(Won .by H. L. MASSEY (“Economy,’*) of Auckland

Ten designs were received in connection with this competition, and we are pleased to note that two were from Australia. The names are as follows: —“Economy” and “Pyramid,” by H. L. Massey, with Mr. A. Wiseman, architect, Auckland; “Veritas,” by Henry A. Mealand, with Mr. Gerald E. Jones, Lie. H.1.8.A., Auckland; “Boulder,” by Neville H. Arden, with Mr. Frank Messenger, architect, New Plymouth; “T Square,” by Sid Duckmanton, 157 Victoria Avenue, Melbourne; “Peter,” by Thomas MHntyre, with Mr.

J.. M. Dawson, of Wellington; "Casa," by 11. E. Saunders, with Mr. T. L. Flaus, Christchurch; "Tearlach," by Chas. B. W Arthur, with Mr. W. Gray. Young, Wellington; "Apposite," by C. B. Watkin, with Mr. W. A. Holman, Auckland;

give the students the benefit of his further criticism. We trust competitors will take advantage of this offer, which is no slight one from a busy professional man. His report runs as follows—- “ Most of the ten designs submitted display con-

"Compasses," by F. Ditterich, with Mr. John S. Gawler, A. E.V.1. A., Melbourne. Mr. W. Fielding, Lie. E.1.8.A., who has kindly adjudicated in this competition, speaks well of the designs sent in, and has requested us to state that should any competitor care to send his plans to him (or request us to do so), he will be most happy to

PLAN.

BLOCK • PLAA 2*ormio*#t

sideratfle merit, and several are well thought out and ingeniously contrived, especially in regard to the planning and general arrangement of the .site. "The competitors have as a rule designed the cottage in an appropriately simple and unpretentious manner, but not all have 'risen to the occasion' in the laying out of the grounds. Some have

been painstaking to a degree in the design and execution of a heading or a 'north point,' to the neglect of more important matters. "All details should be carefully checked on completion. Some students have omitted to .show section lines on plan, whilst others show doors hung wrongly. Again, although not every bedroom may need a fireplace, ventilation should be provided where fireplaces are dispensed with. winner. 'Economy,' 'Pyramid,' 'Boulder,' and 'Veritas' all send commendable designs, but the last three lose marks owing to their schemes being

well indicated on the l-Bin. scale drawings, but the block plan is 'T. Square's' weak point. " 'Compasses.'The criticism of 'T Square' applies in some respects to this design. The sleeping porch is 'to become a vestibule after additions are carried out,' but the author does not indicate how it is to be lighted, neither is it advisable to walk out from the best bedroom into the entrance porch. This bedroom, by the way, has no less than three doors opening into it. Turning to the site plan, one notices that the croquet lawn, which was not mentioned in the schedule of requirements, occupies a large share of the grounds, and the

a little too ambitious. 'Economy' has been true to his motto, ami partly on that account has been awarded the prize. < Here are a few brief comments on each of the designs:— " 'T Square.'—an fairly good, but does not lend itself to future extension. The rooms are of good size and well proportioned, but windows are too small and not well placed. When the 'future rooms are added the living room and kitchen will be badly lighted. External treatment good, and materials specified should prove satisfactory. Generally the design shows care and thought, but little originality, and the gardens, etc., are not so well planned as in some of the others. The detail is

kitchen and flower gardens are conspicuous by their absence. The bowling alley is far too small, as in fact it is on several of the plans. " Tearlach' sends a compact little plan with some good points, but the future additions are not sufficiently clear. W.C. badly placed, and position of windows not happy, particularly in the middle bedroom, where a partition wall almost disappears to make room for the window! This is apparently done in order to improve the side elevation. I need hardly point out that the position of windows or other features in elevation should invariably be subordinate to the exigencies of the plan. " 'Apposite.'—Living room conveniently placed

and roomy, but bedrooms rather too small, whilst the open porch is larger than need be. This student makes the mistake of placing the cottage too near the boundary of the section, otherwise the lay-out is fairly good. Details artistic though not too refined. The drawings are creditably finished, and show promise of future achievement.

‘Boulder.’—Well planned as regards points of compass, and rooms nicely arranged. More future accommodation has been provided than was asked for, and the immediate accommodation plainly exceeds the cubical contents necessary to permit the cottage to be erected for the stipulated sum. The attic sitting-room is a somewhat novel idea, and possibly might appeal to our imaginary client. Much thought has been expended on the arrangement of the grounds, which are well planned, although it would have been better if the tennis lawn and howling alley had been contiguous. Materials for construction are well chosen, and the elevations are simple and cottage-like. There are fewer small faults in this design than in most of the others. “ ‘Economy’ (placed first). — capital plan, with exception of kitchen portion, which is a trifle too congested. The living-room is well placed, and commands a good view. Elevations as well as

internal details are quiet and restrained. Future additions would mutilate the original building rather too much. 'Economy' has made the most of his opportunities in laying out the small estate, and the grounds are excellently well arranged. Choice of materials fairly good, though corrugated iron is not an ideal roof covering and the amount our

client is supposed to spend would admit of something more attractive. “ ‘Pyramid’ sends an exceedingly good design, which, however, is not without faults. For instance, the living room fireplace is carelessly placed and that in the upper bedroom could well be dispensed with. The planning of the future rooms in the roof is not too satisfactory. ‘Pyramid’ and ‘Economy’ have evidently some ideas in common, and both show a good arrangement of the grounds, which are well observed from the main verandah.

The elevations are particularly pleasing, and the drawings are well finished. Unfortunately the cost works out too high. " 'Veritas' has a pleasing design, which, however, could not be carried out for anything like the amount allowed in the conditions. The author is wrong in his cubical contents to the tune of over 3000 feet. This, taking his own price of 5d., which is a low one, brings the cost well over £4OO. Some originality is shown in the detailing, and the grounds are fairly well laid out. Bowling alley again too small, and verandah should overlook the grounds. " 'Peter' is evidently a younger competitor, but he displays promise, and although his effort is of somewhat ordinary type, the plan shows rooms of good size and proportions, and well lighted. " 'Casa.'— good plan and showing some evidence of originality. Elevations well treated, but inclined to be restless in detail. Draughtsmanship neat and distinct. Arrangement of garden, etc., is good, but a bowling alley 62 feet long is of little use, and it is as well to avoid winding paths, especially in the main approach. The drainage problem has not been ignored, and the J-in. detail is well drawn, but no particulars or dimensions are indicated thereon.