ABOUT | PRESS | LECTURES & PRESENTATIONS

JOHN BROWN is the editor of theslowhome.com and the founder of the Slow Home Movement. He is a registered architect, real estate broker and Professor of Architecture at the University of Calgary.

Cheskey Residence

Jan 31, 2008

The Cheskey Residence by Qb of Philadephia

Digg This | Share on Facebook
Filed under: Projects | Comments[5]
Comments:
I just discovered this site thru the NYT article. As a professional builder, I try to build quality and value, which is why I would NEVER build a flat roof. Why do all these houses have that feature? Unles you are in the desert, it makes no sense, except in the case of green roofs, I suppose, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.

Posted by Gred on January 31, 2008 at 10:42 AM MST #

Thanks for the comment. However, from my experience as both an architect and a contractor I am afraid I don't agree with you. Except in very high snow load environments there are very few differences between flat and sloped roofs from a performance point of view.

Posted by John Brown, Editor on January 31, 2008 at 02:01 PM MST #

I, too, just hit the site for the first time. Uh-oh, the home page has photos with four guys wearing black - Luke, I got a bad feeling about this. Then I see the Cheskey residence. Holy latent spatial and situational aspects, Batman, is that ugly! Not the component structures mind you, it's the forced look of the two combined that doesn't work. Hey, I own a New Englander and I would live at Rag Flats, but here they just look jammed together. A bold but ultimately unsuccessful experiment. Good, though, to see architects building their own creations. Too many products seem designed by people who never have to use them. (Which makes me wonder if the home is satisfying to live in if not to look at.)

Posted by jeem on January 31, 2008 at 02:18 PM MST #

The Cheskey destruction of this beautiful, turn of the century farmhouse is a disaster. Why take an existing design that works and ruin it? Your only objective here seems to be the shock value of combining two unlikely design elements, a trick that was boring the second time some second architecture student tried it. Ugh. What a waste of resources and a predictable, juvenile response.
If you wanted to do something innovative, why not improve the funtion of the farmhouse by creating a graceful passive solar wall that will help heat the home? There are hundreds of other ideas that could have enhanced the beauty of this home while respecting the design and history of the original building.
By the way, I love modern design and love subtle combinations of traditional and modern elements. My objection is not to this concept. This project simply looks like a tornado lifted, moved and then slammed the local McDonald's into an an existing farmhouse. It has that wink, wink, nod, nod smug element of design superiority that makes me cringe. Ultimately the home becomes a billboard shouting: "Aren't we clever? Aren't we superior?"
Go back to preschool and play with yor leggos Mr.Cheskey, and leave beautiful, old homes to people who appreciate them.

Posted by Joan Bartos on February 01, 2008 at 08:42 PM MST #

Horrible!

It is pretty amazing that something like this would not get shot down by a zone commission. Of course the modern structure is functional and very impressive, but sandwiched onto that older home? Ridiculous.

Posted by Why? on February 06, 2008 at 11:52 AM MST #

Post a Comment:
Comments are closed for this entry.
« Paul Cha Architect -... | Main | Green Levittown »






We believe that our homes and neighborhoods should be healthy, vibrant places that uplift the spirit and gracefully fit our needs. We call for an end to poor construction, bad design, misleading marketing, unfair lending practices and environmental neglect in the housing industry. We acknowledge our collective responsibility to create CLOSE, SIMPLE, LIGHT places to live that leave a positive legacy for future generations.

provides design focused information that homeowners can use to improve the quality of how and where they live. It takes its name from the slow food movement which arose as a reaction to the processed food industry. The sprawl of cookie cutter housing that surrounds us is like fast food - standardized, homogenous, and wasteful. It contributes to a too fast life that is bad for us, our cities, and the environment. In the same way that slow food raises awareness of the food we eat and how these choices affect our lives, Slow Home empowers you to take more control of your home and improve the quality of how you live while reducing your environmental impact and futureproofing the long term investment value of your home.