Modern Masterpiece On The Market For $2.5 Million
September 16, 2015
Designed by renowned Bay Area architect Donald Olsen and hidden across a creek and behind a custom gate in Claremont, the modern masterpiece at 256 The Uplands was built in 1967.
The four-bedroom home measures 3,483 square feet, with a 15-foot ceiling and walls of glass in the living, dining and kitchen pavilion, behind which there’s a breakfast nook and terrace.
And having never before traded hands, as far as we know, the Bauhaus-style home has just hit the market listed for $2.5 million.
Comments from Plugged-In Readers
Comments are closed.
Realtors like to use the word stunning. Here is a worthy home.
Gorgeous.
Oh man. I wish I had 2.5MM right now.
Unfortunately, for me, I love the house and the environment. However, all the trees give me the heeby-jeebies, considering what is going on in California this summer.
The great Oakland hills fire of October 1991 came very close to this place. It is perched near the Hayward Fault, along the edge of the crush zone. The fire ebbed there as the wind shifted, else this house most likely would have burned. That should afford some protection from a future fire as the burned areas were rebuilt with less foliage and more fire resistant homes. The FEMA report (namelink) is gripping:
“On the hill above the Claremont Hotel, the fire was advancing through a mixture of modern homes and stately mansions, working its way down the hillside. With the hotel protected by master streams, poised for action, the crews climbed the hill to engage the fire on the upper streets, but found that the hydrants on the upper streets were dry. They returned to the bottom and started up again, handstretching a 5-inch hoseline to support an offensive attack on the fire. The fire was successfully held at Alvarado Road.
In the Rockridge district, the 5-inch hose and portable hydrant system was used to bring a strong water supply into the area where San Francisco units were operating. Several companies were able to obtain water from the portable hydrants.
The main battle continued until approximately 1930 hours, when the wind finally abated. The smoke and heat changed from pushing ahead of the fire to rising vertically as the wind eased off. Within a few minutes, a cool damp ocean breeze began to push the products of combustion back into the burn area. This stopped the uncontrollable advance of the fire, but left a huge perimeter of blazing homes that continued to expose adjacent structures.”
This is a version of a dream home! What a beautiful home with simple modern elements throughout.
This will go very fast!
I really do not like this house. Something is off putting and it’s not necessarily the style/architecture. The setting perhaps? A bit creepy? Too museum like? Not one feature that is warm or inviting? Remote location?
Black-rimmed glasses and a turtleneck and you’d feel right at home.
1967? Wow, Olsen was really ahead of his time.
The Uplands, remote location!
This house is a good reminder that ‘modern’ is a style that has been around since the 1920s. Listening to its propagandists like the AIA (especially the AIA SF), this style is perennially ‘new’ (witness the houses they feature on their tours each year in SF and Marin) but it is just as much a historical style as Palladian, Arts and Crafts, or Victorian.
The location is a little dark and creepy. Scream 5?
The kitchen needs an update. No problem with this price point.
I wonder what’s up with the post in the living room.
It means that the architect signed off on the contract before the engineer.
The contrast of this to Scott McNealy’s house couldn’t be more stark. McNealy’s house is like a giant tract house – expensive and large, to be sure, but generally not designed for the site and complete with all the architectural gimcracks that were popular at the moment. I’m sure McNealy’s house has the requisite wine cellar, exercise room, whirlpool tub in the master bath, etc. All things that big tract homes have, and with just as little style.
This house, on the other hand, was designed for the site and will command a premium just because of the architecture.
You forgot home theater. Dontcha know every luxury home needs a
gloomy basement storage spacespecial room to watch blu-rays?With individual recliner seating because, as we long suspected, the rich don’t snuggle.
Or maybe that is to frustrate their teenagers trying to reach 3rd base. But, haha, that won’t do much to stop horny teens.
Wow, amazing! Like seriously, $2.5M is a steal. This is like ART!
For that kind of money, I’m still going with a house in the hills. Bay and city views, with mid-century architecture and a pool to boot.
Nice interiors. Troubling phrase, though: “3 lower vacant lots available.” If you don’t purchase those too, are your views lost?
Your views and, I assume, the tennis court.
I get that it’s in the woods, but I’m troubled by the lack of window coverings.
I bet it sells for over asking. Nice home. But—no really good views and you have to drive everywhere.
The location is not really that remote. It’s one mile from Rockridge BART and College Avenue; half a mile from the corner of Claremont and Ashby (which is then a very short bus ride to BART — name link). Far more central than the place EBGuy posted. I have a couple of colleagues who live at the Uplands (but closer to Claremont) and have walked to/from BART every day for years for the SF commute.
UPDATE: The list price for 256 The Uplands has been reduced $265,000 (10.6 percent), now asking $2,235,000.