the case study house program

• Eames Foundation

find us on:

• Eames House
• Charles and Ray

Eames House and the CSH program

• Case Study House Bluff
• Photo Gallery
• How to Visit
• Covid-19 Safety Protocols
• Guided Exterior Tour
• Group Guided Exterior Tour
• Interior Tour
• Members Appreciation Day
• Small Wedding
• Specialty Events
• Visitors Submissions
• Memberships
• Corporate Sponsorship
• 250 Year Project
• Collections
• On-going Studies
• Conservation Management Plan
• Team Thanks

The Eames House (also known as Case Study House No. 8) is a landmark of mid-20th century modern architecture located in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood of Los Angeles. It was designed and constructed in 1949 by husband-and-wife Charles and Ray Eames to serve as their home and studio.

It was one of roughly two dozen homes built as part of The Case Study House Program. Begun in the mid-1940s and continuing through the early 1960s, the program was spearheaded by John Entenza, the publisher of  Arts & Architecture magazine. It was developed to address a looming issue: a housing crisis. Millions of soldiers would be returning from the battlefields of World War II, and were wanting to start families. John Entenza recognized that houses needed to be built quickly, inexpensively, yet without sacrificing good design. In a challenge to the architectural community, the magazine announced that it would be the client for a series of homes designed to express man’s life in the modern world. These homes were to be built and furnished using materials and techniques derived from the experiences of the Second World War. Each home was designed with a real or hypothetical client in mind, taking into consideration their particular housing needs.

Click here to see their design brief more clearly from the December 1945 issue of Arts & Architecture .

First Design: Bridge House (unbuilt)

The first plan of the Eameses’ home, known as the Bridge House, was designed in 1945 by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen. The design used pre-fabricated materials ordered from catalogues, a continuation of the idea of mass-production. The parts were ordered and the Bridge House design was published in the December 1945 issue of the magazine, but due to a war-driven shortage, the steel did not arrive until late 1948.

While they were waiting for delivery, Charles and Ray picnicked in the meadow with family and friends, flew kites and did archery.  By then, Charles and Ray had “fallen in love with the meadow,” in Ray’s words, and they realized that they wanted to avoid what many architects had done: destroy what they loved most about a site by building across it.

Second Design: Eames House

Charles and Ray then set themselves a new problem: How to build a house that would 1) not destroy the meadow and trees, and 2) “maximize volume from minimal materials”.  Using the same off-the-shelf parts, but notably ordering one extra steel beam, Charles and Ray re-configured the House. The new design integrated the House into the landscape, rather than imposing the House on it. These plans were published in the May 1949 issue of Arts & Architecture .  It is this design that was built and is seen today.

Charles and Ray moved into the House on Christmas Eve, 1949, and lived there for the rest of their lives.  The interior, its objects and its collections remain very much the way they were in Charles and Ray’s lifetimes.  The house they created offered them a space where work, play, life, and nature co-existed.

While many icons of the modern movement are depicted as stark, barren spaces devoid of human use, photographs and motion pictures taken at the Eames house reveal a richly decorated, almost cluttered space full of folk art, thousands of books, shells, rocks, prisms, etc. The Eameses’ gracious live-work lifestyle continues to be an influential model.

The House has now become something of an iconographic structure visited by people from around the world.  The charm and appeal of the House is perhaps best explained in the words of the Case Study House Program founder, John Entenza, who felt that the Eames House “represented an attempt to state an idea rather than a fixed architectural pattern.”

Help us share the Eameses’ joy and rigor with future visitors, so they may have a direct experience of Charles and Ray’s approach to life and work.

By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy . We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services.

THE CASE STUDY HOUSES

• Share on Facebook
• Show more sharing options
• Share on WhatsApp
• Print This Page
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share to Flipboard
• Submit to Reddit
• Post to Tumblr

SURPRISINGLY THE AMERICAN ARCHITECTURAL magazine most often found in the foreign architect’s office or School of Architecture is the California publication Arts & Architecture . In its pages the foreign archi­tect and student is exposed to an array of buildings of a remarkably high degree of quality. (He is also exposed to the writings of two of America’s most gifted critics, Peter Yates, in music, and Dore Ashton, in painting and sculpture). The wide acceptance and influence of Arts & Architecture  abroad has cer­tainly been due to its view of architecture as an art, rather than as a vast business enterprise, the ap­proach which underlies a majority of America’s archi­tectural publications. Related POP ART, USA MUSE AND EGO

One of the magazine’s most influential and far reaching programs has been its sponsorship of a series of Case Study Houses , where new concepts of form, material and structure could be tested out in residential architecture. The program was insti­tuted in 1945 and the first of these experimental houses was built the following year. Since this date, over 25 houses have been constructed and several are at present in the design stage or are in process of being built. Photographs and plans of these case study houses have recently been brought together by Esther McCoy in a single volume entitled Modern California Houses, Case Study Houses 1945–1962 , (published by Reinhold Publishing Corp., New York, 1962, $15.00). Esther McCoy has long been associated with Arts & Architecture . As a critic and historian she has con­tributed immensely to our understanding of 20th century architecture in California. Her writing on the work of Irving Gill, Bernard Maybeck the brothers Charles and Henry Greene and R. M. Schindler has re­vealed to us an almost entirely unknown chapter in the history of modern architecture. As we should ex­pect, this book, its text, the quality of its plates and its design layout are as distinguished as the buildings which it discusses and illustrates.

To fully appraise the Case Study program one should first see it within the context of similar endeavors which have been tried from time to time in this country and abroad. Throughout the 20th century, nu­merous “Idea houses” or “Houses of the future” have appeared in exhibitions and others have been spon­sored by home and women’s magazines. In 1927–28 the internationally famous Weissonhof housing proj­ects featured designs by Le Corbusier, Gropius, Mart Stam, J. J. P. Oud and others. A similar project to encourage the acceptance of modern architecture was instituted before the Second World War by the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis in their first “Idea house,” and continued in a second “Idea house” con­structed in 1947 behind the Center. In 1948 The Museum of Modern Art commissioned Marcel Breuer to build an exhibition house in the Museum court­yard; a second house was commissioned in 1950 to the California architect Gregory Ain. In the 1950’s the Guggenheim Museum, as part of its exhibition of Frank Lloyd Wright, built one of his “Usonian” houses.

Few of these programs have been able to sustain themselves for any appreciable length of time and it is difficult to say whether they have actually pro­duced their desired result. Even the influential ex­hibition and publication program of the Museum of Modern Art in architecture and design, first under Phillip Johnson in the early 1930’s, and later in the 40’s and early 50’s under Edgar Kaufman has pretty well fallen into a respectable intellectual doldrum in the hands of Arthur Drexler.

That this path is a precarious one is well illustrated by several of the most recent Case Study Houses, especially the Towri House on the Rivo Alto Canal, near Long Beach, and the Triad Development of houses at La Jolla, all by the firm of Killingsworth, Brady and Smith. In each of these houses there is a decided tinge of what has so aptly been labeled “Hollywood Regency.” Not that their forms are in any way eclectic––there is no evidence whatsoever of “French Provincial” or “English Regency” which is the normal mode of the Beverly Hills version of “Holly­wood Regency.” Yet their own involvement with formalism, with forced symmetry and their self-con­scious concern for uncluttered forms and surfaces has created a preciousness which compromises their total architectural statement. Man’s physical frame may well be symmetrical, but this does not mean that he necessarily lives or operates in this way. There is something dramatic about entering a house over a bridge, or via a series of stepping stones over a pool of water, but in the end is this architecture or simply a stage setting? In their house “A” at La Jolla, Kil­lingsworth, Brady and Smith provide this stagey, im­pressive entrance for guests and visitors and then they furnish an entrance for the family directly off the garage area which frankly conveys the informality of the contemporary California scene.

The view of architecture as an intellectual exercise in the realm of pristine sharp-edged forms and pre­cise proportions has long been a dominant theme in the Case Study program (as it has continually cropped up throughout the history of architecture), but in the earlier Case Study Houses by Craig Ellwood and Pierre Koenig the esthetic articulation of planes and volumes defined by precise rectangular shapes had been dominated by the structural form of the building. In Killingsworth, Brady and Smith there is a tendency to play down the structure as the salient motif and in its place to substitute an involvement with form.

The most recent of the Case Study Houses reveals as well a marked shift in the use of materials and the way in which they are exposed. The employment of steel as a relatively new building material in do­mestic architecture was initiated in the Case Study House program by Charles Eames for his own house and studio, built in 1949. The Eames house was the most successful of all the Case Study Houses in that it illustrated how the mass-produced product might be used in domestic architecture. The Eames house used materials, primarily steel and glass, in such a way that their quality of regularity and order never dominated the total form. In the later Case Study Houses of Ellwood and Koenig the steel frame did become the controlling element in the design, forci­bly establishing the surface, the proportion and the volume of the building. In several of the most recent examples of the Case Study Houses this directness of approach to materials and structure has been par­tially abandoned. The materials and structure no longer are an organic part of the design. As Mies van der Rohe, Walter Gropius and even Frank Lloyd Wright have pointed out, good design, especially in our century and here in America, is as much a result of negative self-restraint as it is positive affirmation. Certainly the success of the Eames house was the result of his adherence to the principle of self-re­straint.

Originally the Case Study House program had an­other dominating characteristic and that was its interest in the direct solution of the problems of the mass-produced project house. The first Case Study House by J. R. Davidson was an admirable and highly influential minimal house (of 1100 sq. ft.) and was reproduced as a mass-produced house. The same was true of Summer Spaulding’s and John Rex’s 1947 Case Study House, where a strict modular system was ad­hered to.

By the 1950’s Arts & Architecture had pretty well abandoned any direct concern for mass housing. The houses of the last 12 to 13 years seemed to be based upon the premise of influencing design through osmosis––by creating visual and structural “master­pieces” which will serve as a source of inspiration in the area of project and mass-produced housing. That the Case Study House Project has created significant monuments of the “modern movement” is undeniable and it is hoped that it will continue to do so, but whether this approach, as opposed to its direct in­volvement, can or will affect mass housing (which constitutes well over 90% of all houses built in the U.S.) is open to serious doubt.

–– David Gebhard

Most Popular

You may also like.

Case Study House Program

The case study house program: origins, meanings, and protagonists, on the participation of northern california architects to the case study house program.

________________________________________

Case Study House #3

Information Description Plan Photos Architect’s Biography

Case Study House #19

Case study house #26.

Information Description Plans Photos Architect’s Biography

Case Study House #27

References & further reading, bay area architects’ designs for the, case study house program, 1949 – 1963.

By Pierluigi Serraino

The Case Study House program and the magazine Arts and Architecture are two inseparable twins in the historical narratives of California Modernism in its post-war phase. Common denominator of both was John Entenza (1905-1984), as editor from 1940 to 1962 of the magazine California Arts and Architecture, a title he changed in 1945 to Arts and Architecture, gave an international manner — both in terms of its compellingly lanky graphics and its cerebral content — to what had been mostly a regional periodical of limited distribution. Both the magazine and the Case Study House Program he masterminded hinged upon the recognition that the architecture of his time was rooted in technology, a symbolic source of its outer expression in the public realm.  

The long span, steel, joinery, plywood, modularity, open plan, car mobility, aluminum, and glazing systems, were the tools and the lexicon of the post-war architect and the citizen of a technological society. For Entenza, the environmental habitat of California had to arise from the civilian application of the radical innovations in mechanical systems, new materials, and building science advancements gained during the World War II, especially because of the military industry’s major presence in California.

The Case Study House program started as Entenza’s personal project, partially financed through his own resources, that lasted two decades. This initiative was the game-changer in the authoritative aura that California Modernism acquired worldwide. Entenza led the program from 1945 to 1962 till he moved to Chicago to head the Graham Foundation. David Travers continued it from 1962 until its end in 1966. They both handpicked the architects that were going to be included in the program, absent of a truly objective criteria or checklist. While Entenza wrote the program’s manifesto himself and published it, the houses and architects chosen for inclusion are an eclectic mix of design expressions.

While most of the built (and unbuilt) residential projects of the Case Study House program are located in Southern California, the design community behind this renown cultural initiative is far from regional. In fact, the roaster of architects Entenza and Travers selected during their respective tenure offers a revealing picture of both the composite nature of signatures called to fulfill the promises of the January 1st , 1945, manifesto and of what flavor of modernism was being disseminated for the post-war home.

Some household names are from California- William Wurster from Stockton, Ray Kaiser from Sacramento, Pierre Koenig from San Francisco- as well as some lesser-known, such as Ed Killingsworth. John Rex, Worley Wong, and Calvin Straub, among others. A sizeable group of CSH architects was from out of state and had a cultural connection with the Cranbrook Academy of Art in Michigan, the legendary design school founded by Eliel Saarinen. From that milieu, the list is truly impressive: Charles Eames, Eero Saarinen, Ralph Rapson, Don Knorr. Others were from other parts of the country and landed either for family reasons or for college to Southern California. Additionally, others

came from Europe, most notably Richard Neutra from Vienna, Julius Ralph Davidson from Berlin, and Raphael Soriano from Rhodes, Greece. In this eclectic mix, various gradations of common themes- relationship with WWII technology, and material, open planning, one-level single-family homes, and an overall permeable relationship between indoor and outdoor, found specific manifestations in the talent of these creatives. These prototypes for living were conceived as models to shape much of post-war living for present and future generations.

Four teams of Bay Area architects were involved in the CSH Program. Under the Entenza’s era, there was the now-demolished CSH #3 in Los Angeles designed and built in 1945 by William Wurster and Theodore Bernardi and the unbuilt CSH #19 by Don Knorr for a site in the San Francisco South Bay in 1957. During the Traver’s lead, Beverley David Thorne’s CSH #26 was realized in 1962 in San Rafael, whereas CSH #27 by Campbell & Wong, in association with Don Allen Fong, of 1963 for a site in Smoke Rise, New Jersey, remained on paper. These Bay Area contributions have been intermittently acknowledged in the publications surrounding this one-of-a-kind initiative.

Yet, they provide documentary evidence of the commitment of the local community of designers to offering updated architectural propositions consistent with the changing needs of the California, and American, post-war society.

Past Exhibitions

Architecture + the City Festival

Whitney Young Jr.

Cookie banner

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targeted ads, analyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from. To learn more or opt-out, read our Cookie Policy . Please also read our Privacy Notice and Terms of Use , which became effective December 20, 2019.

By choosing I Accept , you consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies.

Share this story

The Case Study houses that made Los Angeles a modernist mecca

Mapping the homes that helped to define an era

Los Angeles is full of fantastic residential architecture styles, from Spanish Colonial Revival to Streamline Moderne. But the modernist Case Study Houses , sponsored by Arts & Architecture and designed between the 1940s and 1960s, are both native to Southern California and particularly emblematic of the region.

The Case Study series showcased homes commissioned by the magazine and designed by some of the most influential designers and architects of the era, including Charles and Ray Eames, Richard Neutra, and Pierre Koenig. The residences were intended to be relatively affordable, replicable houses for post-World War II family living, with an emphasis on “new materials and new techniques in house construction,” as the magazine’s program intro put it.

Technological innovation and practical, economical design features were emphasized—though the homes’ scintillating locations, on roomy lots in neighborhoods like Pacific Palisades and the Hollywood Hills , gave them a luxurious allure.

With the help of photographer Julius Shulman , who shot most of the homes, the most impressive of the homes came to represent not only new styles of home design, but the postwar lifestyle of the booming Southern California region.

A total of 36 houses and apartment buildings were commissioned; a couple dozen were built, and about 20 still stand in the greater Los Angeles area (there’s also one in Northern California, a set near San Diego, and a small apartment complex in Phoenix). Some have been remodeled, but others have been well preserved. Eleven were added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2013.

Here’s a guide to all the houses left to see—but keep in mind that, true to LA form, most are still private residences. The Eames and Stahl houses, two of the most famous Case Study Houses, are regularly open to visitors.

As for the unconventional house numbering, post-1962 A&A publisher David Travers writes that the explanation is “inexplicable, locked in the past.”

Case Study House No. 1

J.R. Davidson (with Greta Davidson) designed this house in 1948 (it was actually his second go at Case Study House No. 1). It was intended for “a hypothetical family" with two working parents and was designed to require "minimum maintenance.”

• Open in Google Maps

Case Study House No. 2

Case Study House No. 2 was designed in 1947 by Sumner Spaulding and John Rex. Arts & Architecture wrote that the home’s layout “achieves a sense of spaciousness and flexibility,” with an open living area and glass doors that lead out to adjoining terraces.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Samuel Dematraz (@samueldematraz) on Oct 28, 2018 at 1:07am PDT

Case Study House No. 7

Case Study House No. 7 was designed in 1948 by Thornton M. Abell. It has a “three-zone living area,” with space for study, activity, and relaxation/conversation; the areas can be separated by sliding panels or combined.

Eames House (Case Study House No. 8)

Legendary designer couple Charles and Ray Eames designed the Eames House in 1949 and even Arts & Architecture seemed kind of blown away by it. The home is built into a hillside behind a row of Eucalyptus trees on a bluff above Pacific Palisades. It's recognizable by its bright blue, red, and yellow panels. The Eameses lived in the house until their deaths. It’s now open to visitors five days per week, though reservations are required.

Entenza House (Case Study House No. 9)

The Entenza House was built in 1949 and designed by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen for Arts & Architecture editor John Entenza. According to the magazine, “In general, the purpose was to enclose as much space as possible within a reasonably simple construction.”

Case Study House No. 10

Case Study House No. 10 was designed in 1947 by Kemper Nomland. The house is built on several levels to mold into its sloping site. Recently restored, the home sold to Kristen Wiig in 2017.

Case Study House No. 15

Designed by J.R. Davidson in 1947, Case Study House No. 15 has south walls made of huge glass panels. Its flagstone patio and indoor floor are at the same level for that seamless indoor-outdoor feel. According to the magazine, the floorplan “is basically that of another Davidson house, Case Study House No. 11,” which has been demolished.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Samuel Dematraz (@samueldematraz) on Nov 15, 2018 at 6:13am PST

Case Study House for 1953

Craig Ellwood’s Case Study House for 1953 is usually numbered as 16 in the Case Study series . It has a modular steel structure and “the basic plan is a four-foot modular rectangle.” But the interior walls stick out past the exterior walls to bring the indoors out and the outdoors in. The Bel Air house hit the market in November with a $3 million price tag.

Case Study House No. 17 (A)

Case Study House No. 17 (A) was designed by Rodney Walker in 1947. A tight budget kept the house at just 1,560 square feet, “but more space was gained through the use of many glass areas.” The house also has a large front terrace with a fireplace that connects the indoor living room fireplace. The house has been remodeled .

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Case Study House #17, 1947 (@casestudy17) on Jun 11, 2016 at 2:20pm PDT

Case Study House No. 17 (B)

Case Study House No. 17 (B) was designed in 1956 by Craig Ellwood, but “governed by a specific program set forth by the client.” Ellwood took into account the clients' collection of contemporary paintings and made the living room “purposely undersized” to work best for small gatherings. The house was extensively remodeled in the sixties by Hollywood Regency architect John Elgin Woolf and his partner, interior designer Robert Koch Woolf.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by BAUKUNST™ El Arte de Construir (@i_volante) on Aug 13, 2017 at 4:42pm PDT

West House (Case Study House No. 18 [A])

Case Study House No. 18 (A) was designed by Rodney Walker in 1948. The house is oriented toward the ocean, but set back from the cliff edge it sits on to avoid noise issues. As A&A says, "High above the ocean, the privacy of the open south and east exposures of Case Study House No. 18 can be threatened only by an occasional sea-gull." The house features a "bricked garden room" separated from the living room by a two-sided fireplace.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by CaseStudyHouse18A (@casestudyhouse18a) on Oct 6, 2018 at 8:44pm PDT

Fields House (Case Study House No. 18 [B])

Case Study House No. 18 (B) was designed by Craig Ellwood in 1958. Ellwood didn’t attempt to hide that the house was prefabricated (the magazine explains that he believed “that the increasing cost of labor and the decline of the craftsman will within not too many years force a complete mechanization of residential construction methods”). The components of the house, however, are “strongly defined with color: ceiling and panels are off-white and the steel framework is blue.” According to A&A' s website, the house has been remodeled.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by MCM Daily (@dc_hillier) on Oct 29, 2018 at 8:32pm PDT

Case Study House No. 20 [A])

This two-bedroom house was meant “to serve young parents who find they can afford just that much,” according to architect Richard Neutra’s description. He also wrote that he used several different kinds of natural wood in the house.

Bass House (Case Study House No. 20 [B])

The Bass House was designed in 1958 by Buff, Straub, and Hensman for famed graphic designer Saul Bass. It's “unique in that it was based upon the experimental use of several prefabricated Douglas fir plywood products as part of the structural concept,” including hollow-core plywood vaults that covered the central part of the house.

Case Study House No. 21

Pierre Koenig designed Case Study House No. 21 in 1958. It was originally completely surrounded by water, with a walkway and driveway spanning the moat at the front door and carport, respectively. The house was severely messed with over the years, but restored in the ’90s with help from Koenig.

Stahl House (Case Study House No. 22)

Pierre Koenig's Stahl House , designed in 1960, is probably the most famous house in Los Angeles, thanks to an iconic photo by Julius Shulman . The house isn't much to look at from the street, but its backside is mostly glass surrounding a cliff's-edge pool. Tours are available Mondays, Wednesdays, and Friday—but book well ahead of time, as they sell out quickly.

Case Study House for 1950

The unnumbered Case Study House for 1950 was designed by Raphael Soriano. It's rectangular, with living room and bedrooms facing out to the view. However, in the kitchen and eating areas, the house “turns upon itself and living develops around a large kitchen-dining plan opening upon a terrace which leads directly into the living room interrupted only by the mass of two fireplaces.” According to A&A 's website, the house has been remodeled.

Frank House (Case Study House No. 25)

The two-story Frank House was designed by Killingsworth, Brady, and Smith and Associates in 1962 and it sits on a canal in Long Beach. A reflecting pool with stepping stones leads to its huge front door and inside to an 18-foot high courtyard. The house sold in 2015 with some unfortunate remodeling .

Case Study House No. 28

Case Study House No. 28 was designed in 1966 by Conrad Buff and Donald Hensman. According to the magazine, “the architects were asked to design a house that incorporated face brick as the primary structural material to demonstrate its particular advantages.” They came up with a plan for two symmetrical wings joined by glass galleries.

Loading comments...

Site search.

• Los Angeles
• San Francisco
• Archive.curbed.com
• For Sale
 in LA
• For Rent in LA
• Curbed Comparisons
• Neighborhoods
• Real Estate Market Reports
• Rental Market Reports
• Homelessness
• Development
 News
• Transportation
• Architecture


Search the Site

Popular pages.

• Historic Places of Los Angeles
• Important Issues
• Events Calendar

Stahl House (Case Study House #22)

Immortalized by photographer Julius Shulman, the Stahl House epitomized the ideal of modern living in postwar Los Angeles.

Place Details

• Pierre Koenig

Designation

• Locally Designated

Property Type

• Single-Family Residential
• Los Angeles

Based on a recent approval by the City of Los Angeles for a new residence at the base of the hillside and below the historic Stahl House, this action now places this Modernist icon at risk. The hillside is especially fragile as it is prone to slides and susceptible to destabilization. This condition will be exacerbated as this proposed new residence is planned to cut into the hillside and erect large retaining walls.

The proposed project received approval despite opposition and documentation submitted that substantiates the problem and potential harm to the Stahl House. An appeal has been filed and the City is reviewing this now. No date has been set yet for when this might come back to the City Planning Commission.

To demonstrate your support for the Stahl House and to ensure the appeal is granted (sending the proposed project back for review), please sign on to the  Save the Stahl House campaign .

Who hasn’t seen the iconic image of architect Pierre Koenig’s Stahl House (Case Study House #22), dramatically soaring over the Los Angeles basin? Built in 1960 as part of the Case Study House program, it is one of the best-known houses of mid-century Los Angeles.

The program was created in 1945 by John Entenza, editor of the groundbreaking magazine  Arts & Architecture . Its mission was to shape and form postwar living through replicable building techniques that used modern industrial materials. With its glass-and-steel construction, the Stahl House remains one of the most famous examples of the program’s principles and aesthetics.

Original owners Buck and Carlotta Stahl found a perfect partner in Koenig, who was the only architect to see the precarious site as an advantage rather than an impediment. The soaring effect was achieved using dramatic roof overhangs and the largest pieces of commercially available glass at the time.

The enduring fame of the Stahl House can be partly attributed to renowned architectural photographer Julius Shulman, who captured nearly a century of growth and development in Southern California but was best-known for conveying the Modern architecture and optimistic lifestyle of postwar Los Angeles. Shulman’s most iconic photo perfectly conveys the drama of the Stahl House at twilight: two women casually recline in the glowing living room as it hovers over the sparkling metropolis below.

View the National Register of Historic Places Nomination

The Conservancy does not own or operate the Stahl House. For any requests, please contact the Stahl House directly at (208) 429-1058.

Issues including Stahl House (Case Study House #22)

Case Study Houses

Related content.

Bailey House (Case Study House #21)

Commonwealth Savings Building (Demolished)

Case Study Houses: The Latest Architecture and News

Defining afro-contemporary homes: the role of case study houses.

The home is a fundamental expression of architectural movements within the fabric of a city. As one of the smallest typologies, it is the simplest canvas to exhibit the design ethos of any particular era. African cities have continuously negotiated the meaning of their residential dwellings, from traditional architecture to colonial architecture, and the influx of post-colonial modern architecture. Vernacular architecture explored homes with spatial patterns rooted in cultural dexterity, envelopes built with indigenous materials and forms, endowed with traditional motifs. These were in stark contrast to colonial homes that featured a range of imported architectural styles across the continent, neglecting their climatic and cultural contexts while amplifying social class.

• Read more »

How Did Materials Shape the Case Study Houses?

The Case Study Houses (1945-1966), sponsored by the Arts & Architecture Magazine and immortalized by Julius Shulman ’s iconic black-and-white photographs, may be some of the most famous examples of modern American architecture in history. Designed to address the postwar housing crisis with quick construction and inexpensive materials, while simultaneously embracing the tenets of modernist design and advanced contemporary technology, the Case Study Houses were molded by their central focus on materials and structural design. While each of the homes were designed by different architects for a range of clients, these shared aims unified the many case study homes around several core aesthetic and structural strategies: open plans, simple volumes, panoramic windows, steel frames, and more. Although some of the Case Study Houses’ materials and strategies would become outdated in the following decades, these unique products and features would come to define a historic era of architectural design in the United States.

Modern, Low-Budget and Easy to Build Living Spaces: the Case Study House Program

Between 1945 and 1966, the Case Study Houses program , following the Weißenhof-siedlung exposition, commissioned a study of economic, easy-to-build houses. The study included the creation of 36 prototypes that were to be built leading up to post-war residential development. The initiative by John Entenza, editor of Arts & Architecture magazine, brought a team to Los Angeles that featured some of the biggest names in architecture at the time, including Richard Neutra , Charles & Ray Eames, Pierre Koenig, and Eero Saarinen , among others.

The program's experiment not only defined the modern home and set it apart from its predecessors, but it also pioneered new construction materials and methods in residential development that continue to influence international architecture to this day. Take a detailed look at some of the program's most emblematic work together with recommendations for facing contemporary challenges. 

When Minimalism Gets Extravagant: A Virtual Look at the Case Study House 17(2)

Arts & Architecture ’s Case Study House program was supposed to be about creating replicable, affordable designs for post-war living—stylish but modest homes for young families on a budget. And then came house #17(2).

To be fair, this house was designed for real clients, with specific and ambitious requirements. The Hoffmans had four children, a household staff, and an art collection. So this was never going to be just another suburban three-bedroom.

A Virtual Look Into J R Davidson's Case Study House #11

The editorial notes on Arts & Architecture ’s 11th Case Study House set out the “basic principles of modern architecture”: an emphasis on “order, fitness and simplicity.” Livability and practicality are key, and “sham” is frowned on. As with other houses in the series, this design by JR Davidson adheres to these goals with clean, horizontal lines, an open floor plan, and integration of the outdoor space.

It’s a modest, compact home, less high-concept than some of the other houses in the programme—no indoor plantings or reflecting pools; no complicated backstory for the imagined clients (think of the next two, #12 and especially #13 )—but arguably more successful in providing a model for the average American home. Its value doesn’t depend on dramatic landscaping or views, but on thoughtful design and attention to solving everyday problems. Walking through Archilogic ’s 3D model reveals the elegance of Davidson’s approach.

A Virtual Look Inside Case Study House #10 by Kemper Nomland & Kemper Nomland Jr

The tenth Case Study House wasn’t actually intended for the Arts & Architecture programme. It was added on its completion in 1947, to fill out the roster, as many houses remained unbuilt. Clearly, the Nomland design earned its place on the list, having many features in common with other Case Study homes and, most importantly, meeting the stated aims of economy, simplicity, new materials and techniques, and indoor/outdoor integration. The different departure point, however, can be seen in the layout. Whereas Case Study homes were designed primarily for families, this plan is for “a family of adults”—which is to say, a childless couple.

The World's First Freeform 3D-Printed House Enters Development Phase

WATG Urban's first prize design for The Freeform Home Design Challenge in 2016 is now moving one step closer to becoming a reality. Since winning the competition, WATG 's Chicago office has been developing the winning design, dubbed Curve Appeal, alongside Branch Technology . Curve Appeal is now undergoing the "wall section testing, research and development phase" with an anticipated goal of breaking ground later this year. This revolutionary project could change the way we construct complex, freeform structures.

A Virtual Look Inside Case Study House #7 by Thornton M Abell

The seventh house in the Arts & Architecture Case Study program was built with real clients in mind: a family of three with creative hobbies. The result, designed by Thornton M Abell , is a flexible home with a distinctive functional character.

The house divides neatly into three separate areas: to the left of the entrance, working spaces make up nearly half of the full floorplan, with living and sleeping areas off to the right and extending forward into the garden. Sliding panels between the roomy central reception/dining area and the cozy living room create the option of privacy or extra space, as required, with the terrace and splash pool beyond offering further possibilities for summer entertaining. A small planting area beside the sliding door blurs the line between indoors and out.

A Virtual Look Inside Case Study House #4, Ralph Rapson’s "Greenbelt House"

The fourth house in Arts & Architecture ’s Case Study program departed from the trend with a noticeably more introverted design. Intended for a modestly sized urban lot, rather than the dramatic and expansive canyon or forest locations of so many other Case Study homes, it couldn’t borrow drama from the landscape, nor would the residents welcome curious glances from their close neighbors—so the house looks entirely inward.

Rapson called his design the “Greenbelt House” for the glass-covered atrium that divides the living and sleeping areas. In his original drawings and model, as in Archilogic ’s 3D model shown here, this strip is shown filled with plant beds in a striking geometric pattern. However, Rapson imagined that it could be put to many uses, according to the residents’ tastes: a croquet court or even a swimming pool could find their place here. This “brings the outdoors indoors” rather more literally than, for instance, Richard Neutra ’s expansive, open-door designs.

A Virtual Look Inside the Case Study House #23A by Killingsworth, Brady & Smith

Only three of the Arts & Architecture Case Study Houses were built outside Los Angeles , and those three formed a united concept. The Triad Houses in La Jolla, a seaside suburb of San Diego , share a single driveway, motor court, and design vocabulary, while being created to meet different needs.

In keeping with the Case Study mission, all three houses used open-plan design, affordable modern materials (such as aluminium and concrete with wood frames), and plenty of glass to create a fresh and open mood. The emphasis was on strong geometric forms, careful detailing, horizontal lines (with perfectly flat roofs) and – this being the Californian coastline – dramatic views and outdoor living space, creating the illusion of more interior space than was actually present.

AD Classics: The Entenza House (Case Study #9) / Charles & Ray Eames, Eero Saarinen & Associates

Nestled in the verdant seaside hills of the Pacific Palisades in southern California, the Entenza House is the ninth of the famous Case Study Houses built between 1945 and 1962. With a vast, open-plan living room that connects to the backyard through floor-to-ceiling glass sliding doors, the house brings its natural surroundings into a metal Modernist box, allowing the two to coexist as one harmonious space.

Like its peers in the Case Study Program, the house was designed not only to serve as a comfortable and functional residence, but to showcase how modular steel construction could be used to create low-cost housing for a society still recovering from the the Second World War. The man responsible for initiating the program was John Entenza , Editor of the magazine Arts and Architecture. The result was a series of minimalist homes that employed steel frames and open plans to reflect the more casual and independent way of life that had arisen in the automotive age.[1]

A Virtual Look Inside the Case Study House #3 by William W Wurster & Theodore Bernardi

The third Arts & Architecture Case Study House has a noticeably different sensibility to that of many of the other designs in the series. While equally engaged with the goal of maximizing enjoyment of the natural surroundings, in this design the architects show more concern for privacy and protection.

The approach from the street is somewhat forbidding; aluminum siding presents an impenetrable front. Besides the front and garage doors, the small, high kitchen windows are the only visible openings, though it is possible to peer over the fence of grape stakes into the children’s private garden.

A Virtual Look Inside the Case Study House #2 by Sumner Spaulding and John Rex

The second house in Arts & Architecture magazine’s Case Study Houses program shows the hallmarks of the series: an emphasis on light-soaked living areas, indoor-outdoor living, strong horizontal lines dominated by a flat roof, and so on. It is distinguished, though, by particularly creative details linking the indoor and outdoor areas, and by a strong awareness of function.

A Virtual Look Into Richard Neutra's Case Study House #20, the Bailey House

The Bailey house—one of Richard Neutra ’s four Case Study designs for Arts & Architecture —forms one of five Bluff houses, standing high above the ocean. The brief was to create a low-budget home for a young family, with just two bedrooms, but offering the possibility of expansion as time went by (which did in fact transpire; additional Neutra-designed wings were later built).

Neutra employed the same indoor-outdoor philosophy that can be seen at work in his unbuilt Alpha and Omega houses, using large sliding glass doors to create light and a visual sense of space, as well as ensuring that the house physically opened up to, as he put it, “borrow space from the outdoors.” With this sunny Californian ocean-view setting, it made perfect sense to use the back garden and terrace as living and dining room.

A Virtual Look Inside the Case study house #12 by Whitney R Smith

In designing his (unbuilt) house for the Arts & Architecture Case Study program , Whitney Smith, like Richard Neutra , prioritized the connection to outdoor space. His motivation, however, was more specific than a desire to extend the living area of a small house. Rather, he wanted to create a highly personal space, geared to the passion of his hypothetical client. Seeing conventional plans as a straitjacket for residents who craved appropriate working space within their home (be it a sewing studio or a photography darkroom), he aspired to fit this house to the needs of a keen horticulturist.

A Virtual Look Into Richard Neutra's Unbuilt Case Study House #13, The Alpha House

Of the four homes designed by Richard Neutra for the Case Study Houses program, post-war thought experiments commissioned by Arts & Architecture , only one was ever realized. In the imaginary village of the program's many unbuilt homes, next to #6, the Omega house , stands #13, named Alpha. Archilogic ’s 3D model gives us a unique chance to experience this innovative concept home.

Each of Neutra’s projects was designed for a family of five, and each reveals his psychoanalytic approach to architecture, in which the house itself is an intimate part of family relationships, as important as the personalities involved. (Neutra was personally acquainted with Freud, and a committed follower of birth trauma theorist Otto Rank.) Underlining this Freudian view, his imaginary clients are not just neighbours—they are related; Mrs Alpha being sister to Mrs Omega.

A Virtual Look Into Mies van der Rohe's Core House

Architecture depends on its time. It is the crystallization of its inner structure, the slow unfolding of its form. – Ludwig Mies van der Rohe

In 1951, Mies van der Rohe designed the Core House, a participative design structure which could be completed by its inhabitants.

This flexible model challenged certain architectural concepts, explored new industrial technologies, and proposed a modular system to improve the quality and affordability of housing.

Pierre Koenig’s Historic Case Study House #21 Could Be Yours... for the Right Price

One of modernism’s most iconic houses, Case Study House 21 (Bailey House) by Pierre Koenig , is now on sale. The two-bed/two-bath Hollywood Hills landmark has been touted as among the finest of Arts & Architecture Magazine’s Case Study Houses , and one of the program’s few truly experimental projects to explore groundbreaking design and materials.

The Last Case Study House

• Architecture
• case study house
• photography

Above: Designed by Buff & Hensman and located in Thousand Oaks, California is CSH #28, the last house of Art & Architecture magazine’s Case Study House program. Photo: Julius Shulman / Getty Archives 

Located in Thousand Oaks, California Case Study House #28 was the last of the program that began in 1945 by Art & Architecture magazine. The Case Study program was an experiment in American residential architecture whose goal was to create show homes that showcased affordable, modern housing in response to the sudden increase in housing demand created with the return of millions of soldiers after the end of the Second World War. Designed by architect Jack W. Buktenica of the firm of Buff, Hensman and Associates Case Study House #28 was completed in 1966 and demonstrates that after 20 years of the Case Study Program the goal of affordable and modern housing had given way to simply showcasing innovations in modern architectural design and materials. The home is still around today and is listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places.

Designed by Buff & Hensman and located in Thousand Oaks California is #28, the last house of Art & Architecture’s Case Study House program. Photo: Julius Shulman / Getty Archives

Here is the text of the article introducing Case Study House #28 as it appeared in Art & Architecture Magazine in 1966.

CASE STUDY HOUSE NO. 28 BY BUFF, HENSMAN & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS

Co-Sponsored by Pacific Clay Products and Janss Corporation

Interiors by Robert P. D’Amico of Ecological Design Associates with Marge Peterek Landscape

Architect: Jack W. Buktenica.

Photographed by Julius Shulman

This Case Study project grew out of a concern with the problems and advantages of face brick as the basic structural material in contemporary single-family residential construction. Despite its wide use in large scale building, face brick is used on the West Coast for its decorative rather than its structural properties, largely because of cost factors, which in turn are the result of stringent reinforcing requirements in building codes and resistance by labor to improved, more efficient construction methods. The architects were asked to design a house that incorporated face brick as the primary structural material to demonstrate its particular advantages. The solution introduces reinforced grouted walls and piers, laid in a standard one-third bond, and designed to take both horizontal and vertical loads and spanned by concealed steel beams. Joining the brick with glass results in a combination of materials requiring no finish and little maintenance during the life of the building.

The site is a knoll overlooking the Conejo Valley development of Janss Corporation 40 miles north of Los Angeles near Thousand Oaks. The house utilizes the site in its entirety, the overall periphery approximating a square and following the boundaries of the usable portion of the lot. In plan the house is composed of two symmetrical wings connected by glass-enclosed galleries. Living, dining, kitchen and study are in one, the five bedrooms in the other of the two parallel 95′ by 19′ wings. The major spaces and the galleries open onto a 54′ by 54′ central court, paved in brick and containing a swimming pool and planted areas, that forms a visual and physical center for the house. The low profile of the house, leaving views from surrounding sites unobstructed, is emphasized by wide overhangs which shade the extensive glass area (4500 square feet). In addition to their visual and sun control functions, the overhangs house continuous duct plenums for carrying conditioned air; the two central brick piers abutting on the interior court each houses the forced-air units for its wing. Thus the necessary heating and cooling elements have been made contributing visual factors in a concept that combines form, function and mechanical environmental controls.

The covered area of the house is about 5000 square feet, including the two connecting galleries. All interior floors are brick paver, relating to the brick of the central court and the terraces and patios; the family of earth colors in the various brick surfaces also integrates the house with the site and the larger environment. The combination of the past with today’s technology in the juxtaposition of the warm, natural brick with the meticulously detailed stainless steel framing for windows and sliding glass doors has also been reflected in the interior design.

Click on image for full view.

CSH #28 today. Designed by Buff & Hensman and located in Thousand Oaks California it is the last house of of Art & Architecture’s Case Study House program.

Check out these great books!

I have been secretly hoping that you would do a series on the Case Study houses, and whether or not you do a series, I love that you wrote about my favorite Case Study house. What interesting info – I did not realize that this was designed to showcase brick as a building material. This is one of those homes that transports me, that makes me feel that I have always known it. Thank you for this article.

The Case Study Houses Program

We selected the best Case Study Houses ever built from the famous post-war architectural program. The Case Study Houses program aimed to bring Modernist principles to the masses.

Architects as Richard Neutra, Pierre Koenig, Craig Ellwood and Rodney Walker participated into the program with one or more projects. Unfortunately not all projects proposed were built but many still stand, we selected the most representative ones.

The Case Study Houses Program, Raphael Soriano CSH 1950

[tie_slideshow] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [/tie_slideshow] All the Case Study Houses were designed…

The Case Study Houses Program: Richard Neutra’s Bailey House

The Case Study Houses Program: Craig Ellwood’s Case Study House 18

[tie_slideshow] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide]…

The Case Study Houses Program: Pierre Koenig’s Stahl House

[tie_slideshow] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] t [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [/tie_slideshow] Probably one…

The Case Study House 9 by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen

The Case Study House #9, was part of John Entenza’s Case Study House Program launched…

The Case Study House 25 by Killingsworth, Brady and Smith

[tie_slideshow] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide][/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide][/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [tie_slide] [/tie_slide] [/tie_slideshow] Completed…

Case Study House 10. Kemper and Nomland Kemper Jr

The Case Study House #10 epitomises the aspirations of the program.

Designed by a father and son team of architects, Kemper and Nomland Kemper Jr, the house is a simple, low-cost modern building.

Case Study House 20. Buff, Straub and Hensman

Case Study House #20, dubbed ‘The Bass House” was constructed in 1958 and can be…

Case Study House 8. Charles and Ray Eames

Made a National Historic Landmark in 2006 and included on the top 10 all-time list…

Case Study House 28. Conrad Buff and Donald Hensman

The only house of its kind to be built in Ventura County, California, Case Study…

Case Study House 16. Rodney Walker

Sponsored by Arts & Architecture Magazine, the Case Study House program in the United States…

The Origins of The Case Study House Program.

The best place to start researching and learning about the Case Study House Program is…

Three Houses In One, the Case Study House 23

The Case Study House #23 stands out from the other houses of the Program as…

The Case Study House 3

Today I will share another stunning house included in the Case Study House Program: the house…

Case Study House 21. Pierre Koenig

Within the Case Study House Program, the #21 represents an experiment that the architect Pierre…

The Case Study Houses Program: Mid-Century Modern Architecture

The Case Study Houses Program, promoted by the magazine Arts and Architecture in 1945, represented…

Christian Fröhlich studied Sociology and Studies of Culture at the University of Leipzig and completed a one-year study abroad exchange program at the State University St. Petersburg. After graduation he joined the Institute for the Study of Culture at the University of Leipzig as PhD student. Under the supervision of prof. Monika Wohlrab-Sahr he conducted research in Russia for his thesis on “The influence of international cooperation and domestic political culture on the development of Russian civil society (using the example of aid for people with disabilities)” and was a research fellow at the Institute for Sociology at the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Contact: [email protected]

AVI CHAI concluded its general grant making on December 31, 2019.

Tzietz: Department of Jewish Studies at Moscow State University

AVI CHAI’s investment of philanthropic resources in this program has seen some noteworthy accomplishments. In 2007, with significant funding from AVI CHAI (close to $1 million since 2003, when the first grant was provided to the program), the status of what once was a “Center for Jewish Studies at Moscow State University” the most prestigious and influential university in the FSU, was officially recognized as a full-fledged “Department of Jewish Studies,” making it the first Department in Russian history. The official Department status enabled the program to receive additional classroom space, offices, a small library and student conference room and, importantly, added new full-time faculty positions and a growing number of university scholarship stipends for the most outstanding students. Enrollment in the program has grown from 60 students in the 2004/05 academic year to 101 in 2010/11 and, over this period, the academic staff has been joined by seven young faculty members, all alumni of the program. Tzietz at Moscow State University