I'm sure others of you have seen this recent post on Deputy Dog about so-called nail houses, little houses with stubborn homeowners that remain in the face of development.
What's fascinating to me about this is the jarringly adjacent urban scale relationships shown in these houses.
In the first example, Edith's house in Seattle, look at the relative scale of her front door and the storefront doors. Also note that the gutter line of her roof is roughly 1/2 the height of the overall first floor of the new development.
The second one was here on Archinect a year or so ago, and reminded me then and now of Kobe Abe's The Woman in the Dunes, a must-read for architecture students.
The Changsha example, with a little shop house in front of a huge McDonald's, is amazing: that background scale, the big plaza, huge graphics, bright colors: those are the icons and scale we've come to associate with retail commerce. Yet that little shop/house still retains the scale of a former retail street - one that was no doubt perfectly functional (though did not meet ADA, true).
Anyway, a very cool post by Deputy Dog. read the comments too for more examples.
Not sure if this would technically be a nail house but it is a spite house.
I toe the line at glorifying any of these. Typically, it's always 'development' that's threatening the lifestyle of some single charismatic individual. Everyone gets upset and lawsuits fly. Expensive.
At one point it is a victory for property ownership-- although at least in the US, the constitution doesn't actually guarantee that. It grants rights to personal possession (not landed possession) and for the government to not use your property while you're actually in it. [I don't not want to start an argument about this... if you want to get uppity, please refer to this: Takings clause in the Fifth Amendment and the case in 1908].
On the other point, these little dumb lawsuits really chip away the actual good and fair use of eminent domain. And for one person to generally have a house, possibly tens to thousands of others suffer because of single person's inability to change.
I will say often thought residential properties get an unfair share of this. But it would be even more difficult to take someone's strip mall away.
I'm frankly surprised that China has such noticeable property rights laws.
I think "nail houses" are compelling things to come across because after they've caught your eye, they suggest an unusual narrative. You know there's gotta be an interesting story behind why that house is there. You wonder about the people involved, the personalities, the struggle, and ultimately how the homeowner won out, and at what cost.
Interesting topic and pictures. I remember reading about Austin Spriggs, an architect. In one article, they made it sound like he was holding out for more money, although thats not what it seems like.
I can't believe I read through the entire article and didn't realize there were no capital letters.
Oh my god, this most recent example from the deputy dog comments is tragic. Scroll left when you get to Google street view, then keep turning 360 d. around. What a sad, sad indictment of suburban development!
there used to be a cartoon about this little house that hung around as the city developed around it... very very old, i think it was originally disney [maybe] but i'm talking really old- at the end i think the house was taken away to the country. it looked exactly like the nail house in the beginning of that link, lb- does anybody remember this?
of course, another example of a nail house resulted into one of the most significant houses of the 20th century... the maison de verre. literally built under a nail house, no?
sorry i don't have time to comment further but thought this relevant to the conversation here. i do not post this with the intention of derailing this great subject! ie, i hope this doesn't turn into a thread about property rights or sotomayor.
"nail house" urbanism: victory for the Shoe Sheriff
I'm sure others of you have seen this recent post on Deputy Dog about so-called nail houses, little houses with stubborn homeowners that remain in the face of development.
What's fascinating to me about this is the jarringly adjacent urban scale relationships shown in these houses.
In the first example, Edith's house in Seattle, look at the relative scale of her front door and the storefront doors. Also note that the gutter line of her roof is roughly 1/2 the height of the overall first floor of the new development.
The second one was here on Archinect a year or so ago, and reminded me then and now of Kobe Abe's The Woman in the Dunes, a must-read for architecture students.
The Changsha example, with a little shop house in front of a huge McDonald's, is amazing: that background scale, the big plaza, huge graphics, bright colors: those are the icons and scale we've come to associate with retail commerce. Yet that little shop/house still retains the scale of a former retail street - one that was no doubt perfectly functional (though did not meet ADA, true).
Anyway, a very cool post by Deputy Dog. read the comments too for more examples.
great topic! any other projects to add to the list?
This is not a nail house, but related to the topic in being a jarring example of new and old in an urban setting. Gorgeously jarring, I might add!
Haarlemmerbuurt, by Claus en Kaan Architecten
I've posted it here a lot, but it deserves the attention.
a nail'ed' house?
LB,
Kobe Abe's The Woman in the Dunes, which i read a few years ago really blew me away..
Made me want to watch the film. Have you seen it? I think it is B+W
i couldn't google a good picture of it, but here's a bait shop in detroit that is standing in the way of the second span of the ambassador bridge between the u.s. and canada.
jafidler, that's one sad story.
Ugh, Orhan...that's awful. I've seen lots of examples of it in lots of cities, sadly.
Not sure if this would technically be a nail house but it is a spite house.
I toe the line at glorifying any of these. Typically, it's always 'development' that's threatening the lifestyle of some single charismatic individual. Everyone gets upset and lawsuits fly. Expensive.
At one point it is a victory for property ownership-- although at least in the US, the constitution doesn't actually guarantee that. It grants rights to personal possession (not landed possession) and for the government to not use your property while you're actually in it. [I don't not want to start an argument about this... if you want to get uppity, please refer to this: Takings clause in the Fifth Amendment and the case in 1908].
On the other point, these little dumb lawsuits really chip away the actual good and fair use of eminent domain. And for one person to generally have a house, possibly tens to thousands of others suffer because of single person's inability to change.
I will say often thought residential properties get an unfair share of this. But it would be even more difficult to take someone's strip mall away.
I'm frankly surprised that China has such noticeable property rights laws.
I think "nail houses" are compelling things to come across because after they've caught your eye, they suggest an unusual narrative. You know there's gotta be an interesting story behind why that house is there. You wonder about the people involved, the personalities, the struggle, and ultimately how the homeowner won out, and at what cost.
Interesting topic and pictures. I remember reading about Austin Spriggs, an architect. In one article, they made it sound like he was holding out for more money, although thats not what it seems like.
I can't believe I read through the entire article and didn't realize there were no capital letters.
Oh my god, this most recent example from the deputy dog comments is tragic. Scroll left when you get to Google street view, then keep turning 360 d. around. What a sad, sad indictment of suburban development!
there used to be a cartoon about this little house that hung around as the city developed around it... very very old, i think it was originally disney [maybe] but i'm talking really old- at the end i think the house was taken away to the country. it looked exactly like the nail house in the beginning of that link, lb- does anybody remember this?
found it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y881yjtFluQ
[the cartoon is very anti-urban, though]
We read Virginia Lee Burton's classic children's book, upon which the cartoon short was based, when I was small.
Companion piece:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pxap-M_--k
funny how disney has recycled both into more recent films, 'up' and 'cars.'
Ha ! Maybe we're onto something. . .
of course, another example of a nail house resulted into one of the most significant houses of the 20th century... the maison de verre. literally built under a nail house, no?
sorry i don't have time to comment further but thought this relevant to the conversation here. i do not post this with the intention of derailing this great subject! ie, i hope this doesn't turn into a thread about property rights or sotomayor.
[I can report (further derailing comment -- I'm sorry) that Port Chester is pronounced by locals as "porchester" -- all one word.]
Hey SDr is that the same illustrator as Mike Mulligan and the Steam Shovel?
I guess so -- she was an author/illustrator ?
How about "Tubby the Tuba" and the number "We're Building a City" ? The way-back machine. . .!
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.