one must recognize when it is better and less expensive to sacrifice one feature, 

 in order to take advantage of good opportunities for several other or more im- 

 portant features. One is not likely to find lots which are capable of absolutely 

 satisfactory development. To observe irregular land and to visualize possible 

 plans for it which are in the main correct and which are a sufficient basis for a 

 judg ment of the land's value, is indeed difficult. Nevertheless, everyone should 

 cult'vate a better understanding of planning lots, especially irregular ones, for 

 residences, as the advantages are obvious. 



In the study of planning flat lots, one may possibly have formed some opinion 

 concerning the relation of the main indoor and outdoor features and of a reason- 

 able apportionment of the area of the lot. Plans for lots irregular in outline are 

 not likely to require any material change from the diagrammatic scheme for the 

 main features already mentioned, and must not if the plans are to be convenient. 

 The outlines of the several areas may be less regular than those in the average 

 city lot, but the amount of space allotted to each feature is of greater importance 

 than is its outline; and, as was the case in the simple examples, the position of 

 the house is the most important factor in the allotment of space. Lots of ir- 

 regular outline, or of very irregular topography, may require that the house be 

 turned out of parallel with the street, in order to meet the conditions of the lot. 

 If a building line must also be taken into consideration, the house plan itself may 

 sometimes be slightly altered in order to conform in a measure to the street and 

 to the angles of the outline of the lot. In very rough land, however, building 

 lines are not likely to be closely adhered to, and houses located and planned pri- 

 marily with respect to conditions on their own lots, look best from the street 

 also. 



Then, adhering still to our concept of an arrangement essential for principal 

 features, perhaps it may be further conceded that a more picturesque scheme is 

 both practical and pleasing for irregular ground. A variation in levels, however, 

 involves many practical difficulties, as well as charming possibilities. One must 

 plan for the accessibility of an assumed house site to the public road, by a drive- 

 way and walks. The area suitable for service must be accessible in both its posi- 

 tion and its elevation. Pleasure grounds, as well as porches and terraces, to be 

 most satisfactory, should be, at least in part, on a level very near to that of the 

 main floor of the house, although by careful attention to drainage, gardens may 

 be both convenient and interesting on levels slightly above, as well as a little be- 

 low, that of the first floor. In their extensions, however, gardens may occupy a 

 slope rising considerably above the first-floor level. In this relation to the house, 

 the pleasure ground is more plainly in view from the house than if it were a down- 

 ward slope. Lawns, as well as some parts of the service area, may, if necessary, 

 be less accessible in respect to elevation. While unquestionably a lawn will be 

 more used if the number of steps leading to it is not great, still, if the topography 

 adjoining the house affords an ample area which is comparatively flat, a satis- 

 factory lawn may be made, even at a considerably lower level, and still afford the 

 house a pleasant outlook. The area for a garden is usually much smaller than 

 that required for a lawn, and therefore it is more economical to adapt the plan 

 to an area already suitable for a lawn, even if this requires considerable cutting 

 or filling of the garden. Thus one must know the requirements for each feature 

 in respect to conformation, size, and relative position, and the methods and costs 



