Mid-Century Modern Houses: Worth Preserving

For fans of Mid-Century Modern architecture, the suburban Boston neighborhoods known as Six Moon Hill, Peacock Farm, Five Fields, Kendal Common, Wood's End, Spruce Hill, Snake Hill, and Conantum are iconic places.   Developed over 50 years ago as planned communities by Harvard- and MIT-trained architects working to establish a new vision of suburban living, they remain some of the most stable neighborhoods in west surburban Boston.   Houses of this type rarely come up for sale, it is said, because their owners are so attached to house and neighborhood.   These so-called "contemporary" houses are getting on in years, just like the baby boomers who grew up in them.

In this post I'll briefly review the history of these neighborhoods and try to identify some essential design elements of the Mid-Century Modern house.  These homes pose some specific retrofitting challenges.   In some towns they have also become prey to demolition by developers seeking to build larger, grander houses, and this trend has alarmed many in the preservation community.  Finally, at the end of this post, you'll find links to articles on Mid-Century modern architecture and to organizations working to preserve it.

Mid-Century Modern Architecture and the Boston Suburbs:  A Brief History


Back in the 1950s, there was still plenty of open space available for development in the towns of Lexington, Weston, Belmont, Concord, and Lincoln.   They were now made easily accessible to Cambridge by the construction of interstate 95/128 and the rerouting and widening of Route 2.   Demand for modestly priced single-family housing was high.  Although Boston's older suburbs featured leafy streets and fine homes, to a progressively-minded generation of academics, scientists, and professionals, a new vision of community and home beckoned.   This vision is incarnated in the house style known as Mid-Century Modern, and in the wooded, natural settings chosen for development projects.   As David Fixer notes:  "The siting of these houses, integrated into a wooded landscape that is left as natural as possible, imparts a far more rural quality to the neighborhood than can be found in other developments of comparable density."   These neighborhoods were designed to be architecturally unified and the houses affordable for young families.   Developments  included common land and shared facilities such as swimming pools, walking trails, tennis courts, and skating ponds.

        

Inside a Mid-Century Modern House:  The Appeal of Modernist Architecture


I recently had the opportunity to tour a lovingly preserved example of Mid-century Modern design in the Lexington neighborhood known as Five Fields.   Like its neighbors, the house stands amid mature pine trees and rhododendrum plantings.   No groomed lawns or sidewalks here.   As you drive through the winding streets of this neighborhood, you appreciate the serenity created by the woodland plantings and the relative seclusion of the homes.   Five Fields was developed by The Architects Collaborative (TAC), a group of Harvard Design School graduates trained by Walter Gropius of Bauhaus fame.  They designed Five Fields to be a self-enclosed neighborhood protected from through-traffic by the wetlands around its perimeter and by limited access points off of busy Concord Avenue.  Here are a few shots of the Five Fields and the nearby Peacock Farm neighborhoods:

The Five Fields house, hailed as a classic "mid-century Modernist, Bauhaus-inspired" design, has great appeal.  Like other houses of this type, its common space is oriented toward the rear of the property.   Thus the front of the house, in terms of architectural emphasis, isn't seen from the street.  The entry door is visually inconspicuous from the street (vs. the driveway) and opens on the side of the foyer.  From the street the house appears to be a single story structure but in fact opens up in the back to reveal two full stories, the lower being banked into an incline.  

As a whole, the structure emphasizes the horizontal axis, albeit in a lighter, airier way than do Frank Lloyd Wright's Prairie style houses.   The Bauhaus aesthetic of such mid-century houses is closer to his Usonian models, few of which survive.  The flat, slightly slanted roofline and the house's emphatic rectangular form create a pleasant contrast with the rustic landscape features around it.   The only significant window on this side is the picture window for the dining room, creating a sense of privacy.  

Inside the house, you at once sense the architect's priorities.   The glory of the house lies in its linking of outside and inside.  This is especially true of the spacious living/dining room area (27' x 17') whose  large picture windows open up the space from opposite sides of the house.   Skylights brighten the entry way and kitchen.  The rooms on the first floor are light-filled and inviting.   Here the Bauhaus elements win you over.   The economical use of space makes for efficient living and housekeeping.   The kitchen offers an impressive amount of work space while providing a wide passageway from car to house interior.   The kitchen doesn't include space for a table because the house downplays the traditional division between public and private spheres in the common areas.  The dining room is no longer a formal ceremonial space.  It's meant to be used for every meal, and is immediately accessible to the food preparation space.  The dining room is a separate room mostly by suggestion--an open passage way connects it to the kitchen and a folding screen divides it from the living room.  Its third side is completely open to hall and entry foyer.   The kitchen, in turn, connects directly to the carport.

These elements may not sound new, because they were soon incorporated into the mass-produced tract homes of the 1960s and 70s.   The design of the Five Fields house foretells the ubiquitous "open plan" later builders would use to lower their costs.  But Mid-Century Modern design is more sophisticated and functional.  Here the architect organizes the common spaces by suggesting linked, but distinct activities.   There's a feeling of casual openness:  instead of doors, we have open passageways.  Instead of walls, we have a partial wall, a retractable screen, and a simple baluster along the staircase.    Unlike the simple "open plan," the common rooms feature a variety of ceiling heights and room openings/passageways to keep the openness from feeling bland or overwhelming.   Lighting is functional and unobtrusive, the only decorative fixture being the modest chandelier over the dining room table.

This leads me to the other striking Bauhaus/Modernist element:  the architect's rejection of ornament.   If you haven't been in one of these houses recently, you are immediately struck by the absence of woodwork.   Wall and ceiling, painted in a continuous white, are completely devoid of molding.   The kitchen features the original St. Charles steel cabinets in pale blue.   Windows are bare of both trim and curtains (note:  I saw the house in a staged, pared down state).  Gleaming hardwood floors anchor the space with the warmth and solidity of a natural material, as does the brick façade on one living room wall.  Stairway and fireplace receive a minimalist treatment.   A central floating staircase opens to both hall and living room, and the open stairwell allows more light into these areas and makes them seem even more spacious.   The brick hearth projects into the living room space, but omits the traditional mantel.   The design strips away visual "clutter" and opens up the space so that the eye is drawn to the outdoors, at least in daylight.  If the surroundings are sufficiently beautiful, as they are in this neighborhood, the design works wonderfully.

Modernist living rooms are typically designed with dramatically high ceilings and windows.   It's the most appealing part of the house.   The lower level, while equally spacious, has its rear wall up against solid ground and its front wall open to the back yard with large picture windows and sliding doors.   In my experience (I have lived in two houses of this design), the lower level can feel musty and dark in summer and colder in winter.    

Preservation Issues

Wandering around the neighborhood, I noticed contractors' signs and dumpsters at several properties--evidence of renovations-in-progress.   It will come as no surprise that few of these 1950s houses have been left untouched.   Over the years many homeowners have upgraded their properties by enlarging bedrooms, baths, and closets, or adding a new wing.  Most renovations appear from the outside at least to respect the spirit of the TAC design aesthetic.   Some neighborhoods are protected by architectural covenants, but others have suffered tear-downs and inappropriate replacements.   In Connecticut many Mid-Century modern homes are threatened by the economics of suburban development:  as small houses on large lots they are often a target for developers who want to build huge luxury homes.

Retrofitting Issues        

The home I toured is heated by oil.  The next owners could improve the energy efficiency and sustainability of this property in several ways.   They should of course begin by having a comprehensive energy audit done by an experienced, certified professional.   They could improve energy efficiency by tightening the building envelope (monitoring the resulting humidity levels),  updating the mechanical systems, and perhaps incorporating some solar technology.   (The site has many trees, but there is some good sun exposure on the roof.)   The first floor would benefit from insulation of the concrete foundation and floor.  The large single-pane windows are an issue:  I'm not sure if they could be reglazed with double panes.   New interior storms could probably be added to them.   Smaller metal casement windows could be restored and weatherized.  

One advantage of these homes is that many have flat or low sloping roofs that might lend themselves to green roof systems.   The roof overhangs made me wonder about thermal bridges in these houses:  an infra-red camera would help expose such areas.   The relative simplicity of their construction (by comparison with Frank Lloyd Wright houses, for instance) makes me think that retrofitting solutions wouldn't be terribly complex.   If conversion to natural gas isn't possible, a more efficient heating and cooling system is still possible.  Other remarks:  many of these homes were sited to benefit from the sun's warming rays in winter; in summer tinted window glass film or pull-down metal shades would keep the south-facing rooms cooler.   The exterior shading panels I have seen on German Passive Houses might also be incorporated into buildings of this type.   Recent advances in building science might also help improve comfort and air quality on the lower level of such a house.   This property presents a wonderful opportunity to own a well-preserved example of Mid-Century Modern architecture in a lovely neighborhood.  With the right professional guidance, it could also become an energy-efficient home.   If I ever meet someone who lives in one of these neighborhoods, I'll try to find out more about neighborhood efforts at improving sustainability such as car pools and community gardens.


Sources:




David Fixer, FAIA.  "Hipsters in the Woods:  The Midcentury-Modern Suburban Development."  Architecture Boston (Spring 2009): 26-29.  (copy by courtesy of Bea MacDonald, The Higgins Group Realtors, Lexington, MA).

Christine Hunter.   Ranches, Rowhouses and Railroad Flats: American Homes: How They Shape Our Landscapes and Neighborhoods.  New York: Norton, 160-173.  

Bill Janovitz.  "Modernism in Mid-Century Massachusetts."  www.massmodern.com

Lexington [MA] Historical Commission.  Lexington Comprehensive Cultural Resources Survey:  Area Summaries.   [Includes architectural surveys of Lexington's mid-century developments Six Moon Hill, Peacock Farm, Five Fields] :  http://historicsurvey.lexingtonma.gov/master-menu.htm