The Glass Pavilion by Steve Hermann
California-based designer and developer Steve Hermann has sent us photos of a new home in Montecito that he has completed, and is now for sale.
.
This home is currently for sale, visit Steve Hermann’s website for more info – here.
Photography by Wm MacCollum
.
.
Dan on 12 Jun 2010 at 4:56 am #
Similar to Farnsworth House though has a car showroom underneath.
Lance on 12 Jun 2010 at 5:45 am #
Another stunning home in Montecito. A bit too open, even in a seculded spot, but I’d do two layers of sheers to fix that when you wanted a little privacy. The staging is spot on as well in terms of the furniture, but my favorite room has got to be the bathroom. Sleek, simple and pitch perfect. Mr. Hermann gets extra points for not slapping the toilet against the glass wall as well.
Helena on 12 Jun 2010 at 6:44 am #
love, love, love it!
marcio veronese on 12 Jun 2010 at 7:42 am #
AA – Astonishing Achievement!!!!
Zack on 12 Jun 2010 at 8:19 am #
Wow!!! how have I never seen this house? What is the asking price?
Chaminda on 12 Jun 2010 at 8:53 am #
Great House but the Gullwing is even better
sg on 12 Jun 2010 at 10:20 am #
BRAVO!
Miles Gutkin on 12 Jun 2010 at 1:34 pm #
I LOOOOVE THIS..I would get the touch sensitive glass that turns to frosted glass for privacy and add a pool. Other than that this is my dream home
TW on 12 Jun 2010 at 4:23 pm #
What worries me about this house is that it shows how little progression has occurred in architecture since the International Style of the 30′s. Sometimes an architect will come along and create a beautiful rectangle of our time. But too many still use Mies and his ilk as their starting point.
It feels a little like the masses of furniture designers who continue to reference Mid Century Modern as their inspiration.
Perhaps it’s time to move forward?
F-J on 13 Jun 2010 at 12:42 am #
Gorgeous house, … but I must agree with TW.
JC on 13 Jun 2010 at 1:38 pm #
No pool?
MARCOS SZMARGOWICZ on 13 Jun 2010 at 8:22 pm #
WOW!!!!!!!
Lance on 13 Jun 2010 at 9:16 pm #
Oh boo TW. It’s easy to say move forward, especially when you offer no suggestions. I’m actually curious, honestly… What would you do to make this house more “forward”?
marshen on 13 Jun 2010 at 11:50 pm #
It must be a real treat to be able to build a custom home specifically designed to display the thing(s) you collect.
TW on 14 Jun 2010 at 12:23 am #
I’m tired of having to defend my comments by others who tell me I have to actually ‘design/suggest/display my own work’ in order to give comment. I think I’m grown up enough to be able to give an educated, objective and impersonal comment thanks.
This house is gorgeous enough. In the same way that Farnsworth House was/is gorgeous. But Farnsworth was built in 1951 – that’s a whopping 60 years ago!
The difference is that Farnsworth house created a revolution in architecture. This is just another reworked version. Albeit, a lovely version.
How would I suggest we move forward? How about if we start designing houses for human habitation instead of trophy houses? Or here is a novel idea – how about we convince our clients that they should be building more small, efficient, economical, sustainable houses using local materials? That WOULD be moving forward.
rajesh , india on 14 Jun 2010 at 12:49 am #
SS — simply superb!!!
CAMIMA on 14 Jun 2010 at 1:32 pm #
Nice house to look at. But as TW and others had noted, it is a only a “new” version of older designs and concepts (Philip Johnson – glass house – and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe – German Pavilion). I’m not saying that using ideas from classic masterpieces is bad, but when you use those ideas and do not consider practical “everyday issues” (as taking a bath, or waking up late) and you have to modify the initial concept to solve that, then it seems that the design was more conceptual than practical…
Jimw on 14 Jun 2010 at 5:50 pm #
As much as I appreciate the design clarity and execution of this home I do have to agree with TW on this. Despite the precipitous state of the global economy and the slow yet steady shift of “beginning” to accept the finite availability of natural and man-made resources, there still seems to be an “applies to others but not necessarily me” mindset of recalibrating our sense of need and entitlement. There needs to be a call to step back and better understand how indigenous peoples and even early colonizers responded to and respected the environment and its resources. How then, with modern technologies to execute those principles into living, habitable structures, can we live fulfilled and be more respectful of the global environment. Embarking on achieving that paradigm would be revolutionary. However, money always has and always will justify exception and entitlement for self gratification.
Zaki on 18 Jun 2010 at 8:16 am #
Some guy that is working 100 hour weeks and invented something clever or running a clever company, let him have this house. It is beatiful. Sustainable and “green” building is much much more important on a more commercial level. If “normal” homes are built with this in mind, there is tonnes more to be gained than trying to stop a few millionaires building these crazy although fantastic houses ! But I would say anybody with money enough can make these supercool places, but who are doing the same cool stuff for the remaining 98% with normal income…?
Jaroslaw on 18 Jun 2010 at 1:01 pm #
OK; Never mind the house, the Mercedes car inside is totally cool
AP on 18 Jun 2010 at 5:32 pm #
BEAUTIFUL.Anyone that say anything aginst know they will never get the chance to build something close to that.
james webb on 07 Jul 2010 at 12:20 am #
this house does show a big leap in design and technology from the FH.
sure it continues an aesthetic lineage that mies also was part of.
perhaps he would have done something like this if his was around now
i find it an extremely impressive house.
fernanda on 10 Aug 2010 at 7:16 am #
mies van der rohe house!!!!! AGAIN!!
TRedmond on 18 Aug 2010 at 7:22 am #
Reminds me of the designs of Frank Lloyd Wright and E. Stewart Williams [Frank Sinatra's home Twin Palms]. Elegant, simple, open and inviting. Very nice!
Tony on 21 Aug 2010 at 6:45 pm #
Oh why am I looking at this…I’m doing well keeping the mortgage paid on my house in Los Feliz.
I couldn’t consider this home at any rate…my 2 boys have a tendency to play ball in the house when we’re not home. I shudder to think of what they’d to this house!
It’s a beauty though!
PJeffries on 21 Aug 2010 at 8:38 pm #
The first thing that comes to mind is not ‘progress’ or ‘ground-breaking’ but ‘inconvenient’. I understand that the architect designed the house with the intent of living in it himself but decided against it because of the birth of his daughter… who would want to raise a child in that house? At least it would seem that some of the bedrooms and bathrooms are on the interior and not surrounded by glass walls (though this may be a mistaken assumption), but unless you happen to be a naturist or exhibitionist who’d use the rest? Even with 3.5 acres (which really isn’t much at all) in Montecino you’d still risk having your guests/ gardeners / housekeeping / stalkers / security watching you scrub your junk in the shower and bump uglies in bed.
doquyxu on 22 Aug 2010 at 2:30 am #
This is an awesome house? Common! I am sorry to say most of you crits are have low taste in architecture! My patio can be converted with minimal work and minimal bucks to look almost as well! I can add the wall similar to this one to help separate my rear patio from my neighbor’s newly built two story villa. When I was an Architecture studen at Cal Poly Pomona, I did a similar wall, but my former professor Mr. Richard Chylinsky, AIA, really hated it! He definitely would fail Mr. Herman for doing such…Kudos to who ever is paying 35 mills for this home though!
doquyxu on 22 Aug 2010 at 2:39 am #
This house is a sustainable and green house?
Again…common! My typical home design would serve the same function with way less impact on the environment, with minimal foot print! How can you guys say sustainable when the size is way larger than needs to be for the serving purposes. Most of architects fail to realize that they are design buildings way larger than need to be, while claiming they are practicing green architecture!
Kelly on 22 Aug 2010 at 10:05 am #
You’d have to have someone come every few days to clean the walls inside and out to keep it looking pristine. It’s not the cost of that that bothers me, because obviously he has a lot of it, but just how impractical that would be.
Also, does anyone think that birds would be flying into the walls non-stop? Would kind of ruin my enjoyment of the place if birds were breaking their necks left and right.
j Kvas on 22 Aug 2010 at 2:50 pm #
At least Mr. Herrman didn’t totally rip off Mies van der Rohe’Farnsworth House
Address: 14520 River Road, Plano, Illinois. -Oh, yeah! He did: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farnsworth_House_(Plano,_Illinois)
steven on 26 Aug 2010 at 8:33 am #
hard to tell from photos, but black painting in living room is a chris classen right? http://www.chrisclassen.com
Djao on 20 Sep 2010 at 7:04 pm #
WooooooHH!!!!!!!!!!!!! unbelievable but true. i’m studying architecture, already Hermann u’ll be my idole!! 4ever.
michael on 20 Feb 2011 at 12:43 pm #
“How can you guys say sustainable when the size is way larger than needs to be for the serving purposes.”
How do you know what the purposes are?
Some design clown tried to tell me that what I wanted was to big, I built it anyway and wish it were bigger, I regularly entertain, have weekly family meals with 20+ family members, I have two Christmas parties with 40+ guests. This all went in his green ear and out the other.