Quantcast
Saturday, October 1, 2016

Eagle Rock development abandons the present for the past

Before: Contemporary style proposed by Heyday Homes.

After: Same project redone in Spanish-style. Image from TERA newsletter

Last year, local developer Heyday Partnership sold the Eagle Rock site where it proposed building 19 homes designed in a sleek and stark contemporary style (pictured at top).   Now, the new owners of the project, housing giant Pulte Homes, has reworked the design, and the result is a much more traditional, Spanish-influenced style (pictured at bottom). The new design was presented to The Eagle Rock Association. The association had given its blessing to the Heyday project- called  Ellenwood – but decided to also give its stamp of approval to the Pulte design, which also included one fewer home than the previous plan.  The most recent TERA newsletter explains why TERA lined up behind the Pulte:

Architectural Style:  Pulte’s plan depict s a Spanish style exterior, moderately rich with architectural detail.  Heydey’s plan was contempory.  We concluded that the Spanish style may be a more comfortable fit for the neighborhood.

Setback:  Small courtyards at dwelling entrances allow Pulte’s plan to place the building facades 10 to 15 feet away from the property line, much farther away from the property line than contemplated by Heydey.  The courtyards also provide a limited amount of outside space to each home.  This was not present in the Heyday plan.

Construction of the now 18-home development, which Pulte is calling Mosaic, is expected to begin later this month, according to TERA. Prices are expected to begin in the $500,000 range.



Eastsider Advertising

17 comments

  1. This looks like it could be pretty cheesy (tho it’s hard to tell from the image). Modern done well is great. Faux-Spanish done cheaply and in a generic way (and this looks pretty darn generic) can be horrible.

  2. Looks like Santa Clarita.

  3. “Modern done well is great. Faux-Spanish done cheaply and in a generic way (and this looks pretty darn generic) can be horrible.”

    Wow, let me guess, USC Undergrad, Architecture.

    Here’s my thought “Modern done cheaply and in a generic way can be horrible. Faux-spanish done well is great.”

    If you have a developer that isn’t willing to spend the bucks on modern architecture, you would be wise to allow them to do spanish instead.

    • xanax should help you calm down.. unfortunately there is no pill for pretentiousness.

    • Actually I live in Pasadena, in a Spanish style house from the 20s. I don’t understand how the US could have built such beautiful Spanish/mediterranean stye buildings in the 1910s – 1940s, but everything “spanish style” built since 1980 is such total crap.

  4. poor neighbors, allegedly they agreed to sub lot division for the modern design above. Then Heyday sold to Pulte. I would not want to look at faux Spanish everyday. That design is lame! Not like Pulte is known for high design, nor high quality materials. I feel for you guys. I am surprised the sale of the land wasn’t tied to the original design. sad.

  5. Great, more nostaligic faux tripe.

    • I totally agree — the original style of mixed use like Chango, which honestly reminds me a little of Sesame Street — is far more attractive than either of these styles. The faux-modern looks like Ikea and the faux-Spanish looks like the Orsini (gag). I think we all know the most attractive option would have been to keep the original little houses and restore them. But, if density is where we are headed, then there are definitely more attractive options than the two proposed above. I’d welcome any USC architecture student to take on that challenge!

    • I’ve always wanted to live in one of those apartments just for the sake of the architecture, but have never had the inclination for apartment-dwelling life. Though I love Spanish/Mediterranean styling, the faux Spanish mega-complex on Colorado (at College …?) is hideous. Can they install any more gothic lights per square foot?

  6. That new annenberg building is hideous like most of the buildings at usc. At least the old annenberg building had a fantastic principal guiding the design, you had to communicate with people in order to learn the layout of classrooms in a “communication” building.
    Why should an architect have to reference the past when designing the new. That makes no sense at all.

    • “Why should an architect have to reference the past when designing the new.”

      I dunno, maybe for context… I love hot sauce, but I wouldn’t pour it on my cereal.

      Anyway, I’m not suggesting architects just endlessly mimic historic buildings. But USC / Expo Park has rich history, beautiful stone/brick buildings and inviting public spaces that all combine to create a human-scaled environment very rare in this sprawling mishmash of a city.

      Name me some contemporary architects in LA doing work that activates/interacts with neighborhoods any better than SC, or anything else built around LA pre-WWII?

      Maybe Moule & Polyzoides… I dunno. But I’m sure the list would easily fit on one hand.

  7. That is a shame.

  8. More ugly Mediterranean crap. How sad. It will change the charming character of Eagle Rock.

  9. I live in the Glassell Park/Eaglerock border and I can tell you that the “Spanish style” homes & buildings are much nicer than the modern contemporary buildings. Contemporary building are too cold and simple. The Spanish architectural buildings are so quaint and have so much detail, (wrought iron titles, arches ) like they took their time to go above and beyond and do more work. Just my opinion….

Post a Comment

Please keep your comments civil and on topic and refrain from personal attacks. The moderator reserves the right to edit or delete any comments. The Eastsider's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy apply to comments submitted by readers. Required fields are marked *

*