|
|
 |
|
| Features |
Estates of Grace
Eryn Brown
06/01/2004
|
Experts, historians and
homeowners often disagree over the extent to which an owner should be allowed to
update an architecturally significant home. Some, like LaFetra, are hard-line
purists. “If you’re going to go to the trouble of seeking out an architect who
worked in the 1930s, you owe it to the house, and to yourself, to see it
through,” he says. Daniel Schneider, who lives in a steel-and-concrete John
Lautner design in the Hollywood Hills, agrees: “You’ve got to enjoy what the
architect gave you. You might come in and want a bigger bedroom, but you may not
need it. Give it a chance. We come in with preconceived notions, but the
architect has already sorted out a lot of things in his head. You have to
appreciate what they’ve done before you change it.”TOP VIEW
When we invest in a house designed by a noted architect, we make a
conscious decision to embark on a journey into the sophistication, elegance and
culture of the past. But maximizing our investment—and transforming house to
home—often requires ample amounts of cash, patience and passion. |
Maddening Crowds
Architecturally significant houses are neither for
introverts nor misanthropes. Aficionados will beat a path, quite literally, to
one’s door.
Jenrette is one of the rare architecture collectors who welcomes
the public into his many homes. He purchased his first dwelling, Charleston’s
1838 Roper House, in 1968 for $100,000. In the decades since, he has added six
more historic properties: a 1784 plantation house in St. Croix; 19th-century
Greek Revival and Federal-period houses in South Carolina, North Carolina and
New York’s Hudson Valley; and two New York City townhouses (which are more
contemporary, but have been painstakingly restored and filled with
antiques).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
