apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

It looks like 2 houses were just stuck together...I don't like it.

Ditto.

perfect? not quite.

The interiors are fantastic. As far as the exterior, I love both styles, just not together.

Question, anyone....What exactly is that particular architectural style called on the Traditional home?

I wouldn't typically think this is a good idea, like a home showcased in the last issue of Cottages & Bungalows that had a very modern addition to it's historical host-building.

However, this home is an exception! Not only did they make the exterior blend well, but the interior is kept in the same fashion of mixing the original/traditional with modern. I know a lot of people here aren't fans of unpainted wood paneling, but I wouldn't dare paint it in that home. (I do have an issue with the window treatments in that room, as I'd opt to bring a more clean, straight line to the windows instead of long, flowy panels.)

I think every single detail is enviable.

that is quite possibly the ugliest structure I have ever seen in my entire life.

Very smartly done. It does work.

btoddster, I believe the original home is tudor.

btoddster, I believe the original home is Tudor.

The kitchen is rather nice - and the bathroom is perfect for a loft apartment...

...but the furnishings in the living room are hopelessly unbalanced - the scale of the chairs are overwhelmed by the massive white sofa. And the exterior is awful.

Overall I think it's quite sad what they've done to that lovely old home.

@ btoddster:

That style is quite common among 1920s houses in Los Angeles, where it is usually referred to as "Country English" or "English Cottage" or just "Storybook" - Hollywood being Hollywood, sometimes there are versions that get really extreme: Disney built some little groupings to house employees back then (imagine getting a company house!) and sometimes gave them crazy faux-aging and elfish details so that they looked like the house of the Seven Dwarves.

The interior is nice, but the mash-up of the styles is not exactly there...yet. And I do agree with bepsf on the kitchen.

except the kitchen...ugly

as a historic preservationist, I must say that that exterior is an absolute architectural disgrace.

screenname, I am still thinking it's Tudor with Cotswold (or "Storybook") influence.

http://www.houseplans.com/2732-square-feet-4-bedroom-2.5-bathroom-European-home-plans-2-garage-(28382)

Why would anyone do this? If you don't like the traditional style, why buy a house like this and muck it up with an expensive and hard to resell addition? On a positive note, the interiors look better integrated than the exterior and maybe that tree will grow big enough to completely obscure the Jetsons bit.

adrienne,

please explain how you get to this homes "carefully planned exterior..."

it really is just a busy modern addition smashed onto a traditional tudor style home... not that you cant mix these two without success. in fact the two (if done well) can compliment one another and work quite well. this however does not. very clumsy and heavy handed.

If they like Contemporary why on earth did they buy a Tudor style home. I would not call their furniture Modern it looks more Contemporary to me.
The living room furniture looks displaced, like it woke up and was in a different place, which is a shame because that could be one handsome, rockin room with the right furniture and art. The add on is really cheesy, its too bad.

Sometimes a architectural controlled area is a good thing.
Speaking of-
The Quincy Jones house (that I almost bought many years ago) in Crestwood Hills was knocked down and I believe this was one of the last architectural controlled community/area in LA.

I love, LOVE the Tudor style. I search realtor websites weekly for them in my area. What they've done to the exterior of this place is just sad.

this is heinous. my eyes hurt, my heart is sad.

hahah! typical Austin anything-goes.

more space and money than taste.

I think it looks like a great way to update an older house without having to perfectly sync with an older style.

Horrible. Completely incongruous. I've seen much better here in SF.

Breath taking!

the exterior looks schizophrenic and bizarre imo,
but hey, i don't have to live in it.
the interiors aren't so jarring.

Thanks for the answers on the architecture, everyone! Happy Thanksgiving, too... 8^)

A perfect example of 'Collision Architecture'.

The outside looks horrible! Did a cube just smash into the side of that tudor?

The inside while not terrible, (save the wood cave of a livingroom), is not spectacular either. I have seen a much better mixture of modern and more traditional elements elsewhere, including house tours on this very site.

oh dear...the living room could work with the chairs and couch, but the rug's too small and too contemporary--doesn't ground the room at all. orange ottomans look terrible (that color so doesn't work with all that warm-toned wood). the very traditional artwork with the odd mix of contemporary/modern furniture just looks wrong. successful eclecticism requires vision, this looks like they took a very traditional room and plopped modern furniture in and called it a day. i can't even comment on the travesty of an exterior. as dmh noted, san francisco has many examples of modern additions to older homes that are spectacular, fun and if provocative, so well done that it truly works. this one, not so much.

MrsKJ, I believe I take exception to your statement. Insult the individuals, not the entire city.

I love the bathroom! I like the idea of mixing traditional with modern, as most designers nowadays do with furniture; however, I'm not sure about the exterior, but it does look nice - I just wouldn't do it. For one, I can't afford to, but kudos to the owners for being so brave and letting AT post pictures of their homes - too many critics!!

I respect the owner's ideas! :)

LOVE IT! Great find. I'd love to live here.

I think it looks sooooo contrived and wholly disjointed...eclecticism is one thing, but this just seem so studied...

they do this in Great Britain a lot but it's usually a large room that extends off the rear of the (Victorian) house into the back yard. It's not the kind of thing people get a view of much, but the interior space is so loved, it's not an issue.

This isn't the worst combination of old and new I've seen...but its not particularly great either. I'm not a fan of combining styles. I think it lacks respect of either architect. However I do think the "modern" architect missed out on some basic ideas that could have blended the two styles together. Its obvious he used the gray color to blend the two..but they missed a great opportunity to use the peak of the tudor style and mimic that peak in the new section. They could have utilized some of the same window shapes from the old house into the new structure to tie it together. They could have maintained the same structure height between both style so its more cohesive from the front facade.

Something strikes me as odd. It looks like they've sliced off the right side of the tudor peak structure, then added gutters. It creates just a sharp flat wall that looks wrong. I'm sure the original tudor home didn't have this flat wall. Doesn't flow well at all.

The interiors are great! Although I find that brown wall in the kitchen with a doorframe odd. I would have blown that wall out expanding it into the next room creating a more open space.

This could look white trash so easily. Thank goodness they have a good landscaper.

I think that the marriage of the old and new is great. In building an extension to an older house in a style that incorporates modern materials and techniques it is oddly a more fitting tribute to the original. After all, the original house was probably built using the best practice of the time. An extension that tries to mimic the original style often ends up looking like a poor parady of the original, resulting in a home that appears to mock the design era that the original came from.

The panelling makes the living room look cheap.