For sale: Lloyd Wright's Bollman House - Hollywood, CA

To control SPAM, you must now be a registered user to post to this Message Board.

EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.

This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4777
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

I've got an idea: "Let's paint everything inside white."
Former owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond
SDR
Posts: 22359
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Well . . . would you like . . . GOLD ?



Heh-heh. When Alan Weintraub photographed the house for his Lloyd Wright monograph published in 1998, the house was painted . . . differently.
The author refers to this treatment with admirable tact -- as briefly as possible, and with the perpetrator's name recorded for posterity:

"Interior designer Mimi London has . . . contributed her own sensibility to the house."



Image



Image

Image

Image



Image


Image


Image
Roderick Grant
Posts: 11815
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

When Mimi London put the house on the market in 2014, the interior was as SDR shows it above. The gold (pre-Mimi) worked. The white doesn't. The price Mimi asked was about $1.5M. $3M is over the top, even for Los Angeles.

What an owner previous to Mimi (a FLW enthusiast named Rollins) did was to build a large square room nestled into the "L" of the house, obliterating the yard (last photo). Mimi got rid of that room, which ought to have reduced the value, not double it. Now the next owner must redo the interiors to bring back appropriate hues.

This is one Lloyd Wright house I could settle into easily. Do you think I could set up a Go Fund Me site to get the 3 million?
Roderick Grant
Posts: 11815
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

It should also be mentioned that the only "textile block" with rebar on the house as built was the trim on the redesigned street side balcony seen in the B&W photo #3 above. The main parts of the house were standard concrete block.
SDR
Posts: 22359
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

I wondered about that. Compare new photo to the right-hand black-and-white one above.


Image
Roderick Grant
Posts: 11815
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

The original blocks, which were strapped to the wood framing of the balcony with rebar, failed a long time ago, and the patchwork was an attempt to give it a hint of what it had been.

What I find unfortunate is the change from the three glass doors on the west façade to an entry and a square bay. Apparently Bollman was not convinced by the main entrance on the north side of the house, and wanted a door facing the street. Though it was obviously designed by Lloyd, the alteration (as well as the simplification of the balcony) did not help the design.
SDR
Posts: 22359
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

There are so many differences between what was drawn and what was built -- the first time ? -- that we could almost be looking at two different houses . . .

The corbeled supports to the balconies do not appear on the elevation drawings; the C-shaped balcony parapet construction/decoration does not appear on the building --
except possibly, in modified form, below windows on the garden side of the house, seen in the article's last photo ?

SDR
Roderick Grant
Posts: 11815
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

The entire opus might easily be bifurcated into Scheme #1 (project) and Scheme#2 (as built). Nevertheless, it is a fine piece of work as is.
Roderick Grant
Posts: 11815
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Re: For sale: Lloyd Wright's Bollman House - Hollywood, CA

Post by Roderick Grant »

Again with the white paint!!
DavidC
Posts: 10529
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Re: For sale: Lloyd Wright's Bollman House - Hollywood, CA

Post by DavidC »

DavidC
Posts: 10529
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Re: For sale: Lloyd Wright's Bollman House - Hollywood, CA

Post by DavidC »

SDR
Posts: 22359
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Re: For sale: Lloyd Wright's Bollman House - Hollywood, CA

Post by SDR »

Painted masonry is comparable to sand in the salad: outrageous and inexcusable.

S
eranhammer
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2023 3:20 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: For sale: Lloyd Wright's Bollman House - Hollywood, CA

Post by eranhammer »

In the study, some of the blocks to drywall transitions have a molding decoration. The molding looks to be in much newer condition than all other trim work in the room. Since there are no interior photos of the house available prior to 1987 (the first AD article), it is impossible to know when these were added. I am trying to determine if they are original to the house or added later. I can't seem to find any other FLW or LW transition from blocks to drywall or plaster - it's usually all the way up to the ceiling or full transition to wood.

Thoughts?

Image
Post Reply