John Hudson Thomas Self Guided Tour

Originally presented Sunday, May 6, 1979

By the Ecole Bilingue, the East Bay French-American School

This tour of seven classic Berkeley homes by architect John

Hudson Thomas was preceded by a slide lecture given May 3 by
Thomas Gordon Smith at the Northbrae Community Church
(designed by John Hudson Thomas).

The Ecole Bilingue, located at 1009 Heinz St., is also by John

Hudson Thomas.

The following text is from the tour handout.

Overview Page
[Added in 2009]

1. Kruse House, 564 Santa Clara Find the tour on Google

Ave., 1914 Maps. (Google Map created
2. Spring Mansion, 1960 San in 2009.) You can also view
Antonio Road, 1912 it and fly from house to
3. Pratt-Verper House, 959 Indian house in Google Earth,
Rock Ave., 1911 once you’ve found it in
4. Pratt-Thomas House, 800 Google Maps.
Shattuck Ave., 1911
5. Blum House, 1505 Hawthorne You can also find photos of
Terrace, 1926 houses by John Hudson
6. Park House, 3115 Claremont Thomas on the John
Ave., 1914 Hudson Thomas Flickr feed,
7. Wintermute, 227 Tunnel Road, the John Hudson Thomas
1913 Journal (a blog) or the John
8. Ecole Bilingue, 1001/9 Heinz St., Hudson Thomas gallery.
1915
John Hudson Thomas (1878 to 1945)

Jonathan Thomas was one of Berkeley's most innovative and

prolific architects. Born in Nevada, Thomas spent his boyhoodin
the Bay Area -- until he left for Yale University. After graduation
from Yale, he returned to Berkeley to enter the Department of
Architecture at the University of California, where he studied
under such masters as Bernard Maybeck and John Galen Howard.
Thomas completed the three-year architecture course and went
to work as a draftsman in Howard's office. Two years later he
formed a business partnership with Howard's office supervisor,
George T. Plowman; and in 1910 he established his own
independent practice.

During the four-year period in which Plowman and Thomas were

partners, they were associated primarily with the Craftsman
movement of architecture. Their small-scale buildings were made
of wood and were rustic in nature.

When Plowman left Berkeley for Los Angeles, Thomas shifted his
design approach from the unpretentious Craftsman to a more
assertive style. His residences became dominant in relation to
their landscapes, and wood gave way to stucco for their façades.
The stucco acquired the appearance of more solid masonry, and
Thomas created a feeling of massiveness for his structures by
incorporating such techniques as overscaled elements. Many
times he designed separate windows to appear from the exterior
as one grand unit. His interiors, also, became more dramatic with
such features as prominent stairways. In his designs, Thomas
selected motifs from many different sources and attempted to
combine them into a unified statement. In fact, this tendency to
combine seemingly unrelated imagery into a cohesive design
certainly became one of Thomas' trademarks.

The style set by John Hudson Thomas established the tone for
East Bay residential development throughout the early part of the
20th century. Helping to establish the Bay Area Tradition in
architecture, Thomas continued his practice until his death in
1945.

Commentary by Linda Hayes

1. 564 Santa Clara Ave.

The Kruse House, 1914

(Residence of Richard and Judith Litwin, the second owners)

Entry to the Kruse House is made by walking down several steps

and through an ivy and oak shaded arbor. The cubic stucco
building with its slab-like overhanging roof is a dramatic contrast
to the wooded setting. A simple geometric pattern of squares and
rectangles under the eaves and on the window muntins is
repeated with some variation in the interior. Scrolled wrought
iron eave supports were apparently added after the original
construction, but may have been designed by Thomas. The
juxtaposition of curves and angles is certainly a Thomas
characteristic.

One passes through a shallow entry alcove to a living room

flooded with light by three immense rectangular windows. These
windows are framed by ceiling-high wooden valences ornamented
by a simple, straight-lined scroll. And overscaled fireplace
provides a focal point for the room. The terra-cotta scrolled T’s to
the left and right of the fireplace hood may well be a Thomas
signature, and are repeated in the dramatic black and orange
wall fixtures and dining room chandelier. The black onyx inkwell
to the left of the fireplace was a gift to the original owner from
the architect and was rescued from basement obscurity by the
present owners.

The kitchen remodeling, completed for the Litwin's three years

ago by architect Carly Jensen, takes pains to preserve the simple
geometric motif seen elsewhere. Note particularly the stained
glass cupboard doors just to the right of the kitchen entry and
the use of plain square tiles which echoed the window muntin
design.

Returning to the living room, step up at the fireplace wall to the

almost hidden, narrow staircase, lighted by windows at the
landing. In the original main bath at the top of the stairs, the
pedestal sink is placed in its own mini-bay window and made
starkly dramatic by its surrounding of black accented white tile. A
greatly simplified version of the characteristic Thomas bay is also
seen in the charming master bedroom which includes a corner
window seat, placed to take full advantage of the lovely view.

It is interesting to compare the restrained design and almost

Oriental tranquility of this home with the overall impression made
by other Thomas designs of the same period such as the Pratt
and Spring houses ((houses 2, 3 and 4 on this tour). The Litwins’
home also invites comparison with the simple cubic forms
associated with designers of the Prairie School, such as Frank
Lloyd Wright, which were generally constructed of masonry
rather than stucco, and which were characterized by an overall
design pattern. As always, Thomas' unique style includes the use
of diverse design sources and makes it so much more than a
mere example of one particular architectural school.

Commentary by Janet Hoehn and Susan Fisher

2. 1960 San Antonio Rd.

The Spring House 1912

(Residence of Larry and Angela Leon)

John Hopkins Spring was the grandson of a New England sea

captain who brought his family to San Francisco shortly after the
Gold Rush. As a real estate developer early in this century,
Spring owned much of north Berkeley and most of Albany from
the hills to the tidelands of Richmond. In 1912, he commissioned
John Hudson Thomas to design a grand residence which would
promote his development of the Thousand Oaks area. According
to an account at the time:

“…the virgin whiteness of the mansion will be admired from

great distances on and around the bay and it will stand for
decades as one of the magnificent showplaces of Berkeley."

Daily Pacific Builder, Feb. 15, 1912

The house was sited on a 20-acre plot which included elaborate

gardens, a swimming pool, a tennis court, and a gardener's
cottage also designed by Thomas. Surrounding the house were
broad terraces patterned after those suggested by the palace of
Empress Elizabeth of Austria on the island of Corfu.

Spring sold the mansion after his divorce in 1918. Sixteen acres
of the garden were subdivided and sold, and the house and
remaining four acres became the Cora L. Williams Institute of
Creative Development, a small liberal arts college with a two-
year program. The Williams Institute was most successful in the
1920s and 30s. It continued to operate as Williams College until
1955 under the direction of the Hopkins family who had inherited
the property upon Cora Williams’ death. The present owners
acquired the Spring mansion three years ago and are working to
restore it.

John Hudson Thomas is noted for his deliberate overscaling, and

the Spring mansion is built on a grand Roman scale. All the
rooms in the house open into an immense central hall, extending
to the roof and covered by a skylight 30 feet above the main
floor. Oak is used lavishly throughout the house -- in moldings,
bookcases, doors, and handling. Structurally the house, including
floors and roofs, is built entirely of reinforced concrete. Four
massive doric columns anchor the mezzanine onto which the
second-floor rooms open and flank a grand 15 foot wide
staircase. Under their decorative stucco exterior, these columns
are reinforced concrete pillars approximately a foot square and
visible from a crawl space between the second-floor rooms and
the roof. The doorways are over a foot thick, and the doorway
openings are appropriate for huge rooms. The living room is 24 x
45 feet.

The Spring mansion took over 18 months to build and is reputed

to have cost $156,000. The house contains seven fireplaces, and
each bedroom has its own bathroom. The velvet carpeting and
the tapestries and silk damask wall coverings in the billiard room,
dining room, living room, and study are original to the house.
Also original are the draperies and cornices in the living room and
dining room, and the lighting fixtures, including chandeliers and
the brass sconces of winged flight fixed to the columns in the
central hall. The mural in the central hall dates from the days of
the Williams Institute.

John Hudson Thomas' houses are most often characterized by

bays, steep roofs, multishaped windows, and an eclectic and
romantic, medieval quality. By contrast, the Spring mansion, with
its ordered and symmetrical arrangement of solid and stately
masses, suggests a repose and order based on classical models
and represents Thomas at his most formal. This quality of calm
monumentality, when combined with the technological innovation
of the mansion's construction, stands as a testament to Thomas'
architectural skill and ability to borrow elements from any mode
and fuse them into a unique and powerful overall design.

Commentary by Christinas Meyer

3. 959 Indian Rock Ave.

The Pratt-Verper House, 1911

Photos on JHT Gallery

Photos on Flickr

(Rresidence of Joel and Karen Zeldin)

The three houses that John Hudson Thomas built for John R.
Pratt on Indian Rock Avenue in early 1911 provide a splendid
opportunity to view the architect’s unique use of stucco and to
savor the startlingly disparate sources upon which he drew for
ornamentation. This year marked a change in Thomas' style from
the understated, rustic wood designs associated with the
Craftsman style to a bolder, more assertive approach. Rough
stucco is used to simulate the solidity and massiveness of
masonry. The stucco on 959 Indian Rock Ave. results in a
startlingly different visual impact than that of the Pratt-Thomas
house. Here the impression is of massive masonry cubes and a
horizontal, rather than vertical, relationship to the site. The
overhanging eaves trimmed with a horizontal timber, the squat
dormer window above, and the rectangular windows on the first
floor all enhance the first impression. Upon entering via an
arched front door, one is all the more surprised, then to confront
an array of plaster and wood arches and a variety of ornament
not hinted at by the simple angles of the exterior.

The central floor plan is one of two most frequently used by

Thomas. Just inside the front door, one's eye is immediately
invited up the stairway to a dramatic window on the landing
which lights both the entrance and obscure circulation hall. To the
left one looks through the dining room to an over scaled arched
window framing outdoor greenery. (Thomas is said to have
designed the windows of the three Pratt houses so that none has
a view of each other through their side windows). To the right of
the entry one looks through the living room to a large greatly
curved bay window which invites the impression that the room is
larger than it is. The fireplace inglenook is set apart by an
archway which has the simulator four-square Thomas signature.
Simple copper trim draws attention to the fireplace. More
elaborate hammered copper hoods were a feature of later
Thomas houses. Craftsmen details are again seen in the fir and
redwood entry bench and shelves and in the twin seats by the
fireplace. An angular scroll motif, used in both the dining and
living rooms, heightens the contrast between curves and
rectangles in the house.

Few alterations have been made to the kitchen and pantry area.
A sun porch just off the living room has been enclosed and oak
flooring added -- giving additional interior access to a first floor
rear bedroom. While the original Thomas-designed light fixtures
have not survived, a previous owner installed wall fixtures of the
same era, as well as the unusual dining room chandelier which is
thought to be a Thomas design originally created for a local
billiard parlor.

Commentary by Susan Fisher

4. 800 Shattuck Ave.

The Pratt Thomas House, 1911

(Residence of Ted and Dorcas Kowalski)
Photos on JHT Gallery
Photos on Flickr

The Pratt-Thomas House commands its site as a result of its

massive buttresses and parapet gables and by the vertical linking
of the large living room and second story windows via decorative
woodwork. Characteristically, Thomas' elaborate muntins blend
windows of otherwise radically different sizes and shapes into an
overall design.

The entry on the Shattuck Avenue side is sheltered by a massive

cantilevered stucco box is enormous window floods the interior
stairway and entry hall with light. While he lived in the house,
Thomas himself is said to have taken advantage of this lovely
window by making the upstairs landing large enough to
accommodate his drafting table.

The floor plan is one of two often used by Thomas: the living
room is to one side of the entry; the kitchen is to the other; and
the dining room is just on the other side of the entry’s interior
wall. Few changes have been made in the original design. The
door from the pantry-dining nook has been widened slightly, and
a side sun porch has been enclosed by door and window. Fir
cabinets in the pantry were returned to their natural finish by the
present owners. Fixtures throughout the house are the original
gas outlets electrified.

Fir was used for ornamental trim in this home: note the bench
alcove in the entry and the small candle alcove at the top of the
stairs, two charming echoes of the Craftsman tradition. Wood in a
four-square decorative motif directs the eye to the ceiling in both
the living and dining rooms. This Thomas signature is repeated in
plaster and tile on the living room and master bedroom fireplaces
and is prominent in other homes on the tour. Both the living
room and master bedroom feature cozy fireplace inglenooks, a
design repeated in larger Thomas houses. The large rectangular
windows of the living room and the curving dining room bay are
additional features that foster the illusion of a much grander
scale than the actual size of the house would otherwise suggest.

Commentary by Susan Fisher

Note: The house at 961 Indian Rock Ave. is the third house in the
set of three that John Hudson Thomas designed for John R. Pratt
in 1911.
5. 1505 Hawthorne Terrace

The Blum House, 1926

(Residence of David and Bebe Thompson)

Built for Professor Blum of the University of California Economics

Department, this house is the most recent example of Thomas's
work included on the present tour. The house is sited at
approximately 45° to the lot lines -- an ingenious way to deal
with a steep upslope. From an environmental point of view the
siting is well-chosen, for it creates a southwesterly orientation
which, in the East Bay hills, gives residents ample opportunity for
light and Bay views without their having to suffer the extreme
glare of late afternoon sun. In addition, the siting serves Thomas’
aesthetic tastes very well. From the street the house actually
appears even larger and more imposing than it actually is.

The northwesterly side, predominately in shade, is made the

formal entrance or “front.” There are few windows; and even with
its textured surface the resulting expanse of relatively blank wall
creates a massive castle-like scale. The oversized, cantilevered
bay and support brackets heighten the effect. By contrast, the
opposite or “back” side of the house, which encloses a sunny
garden space accessible from both living and dining rooms, is
open, airy, and entirely domestic in scale. For those admitted to
this private zone, the house becomes a cottage. There is almost
an Alice in Wonderland quality in the way that Thomas has sifted
scale from front to back. Indeed, there is a comparable wit and
playfulness which abounds throughout the house and which is
characterized by the way Thomas takes the detailing and opening
of the front door and completely inverts them on the two doors
leading from the dining room to the garden.

The study at the top of the stairs is the only room with four right
angled corners. After construction was begun, this room was
added to the plan at the request of the client, who developed a
sudden and confining illness that made it necessary for him to
work at home. The overlook from this room to the clerestory
space of the living room is a true period piece, as it was highly
fashionable at that time to have entertainers use such a space for
recitations or musical performances. Originally, the study space
was to have been an open area which would have given the front
elevation of the house an additional gable and an even more
complex appearance.

Commentary by Jay Claiborne

6. 3115 Claremont Ave.

The Park House, 1914

(Residence of Laurence and Joanne Brownson)

Access to the Park House is over a creek, through a grove of oak

trees and up meandering garden steps. It is difficult to get an
overall view of the house, secluded thus in the trees, in order to
appreciate the bold massing of stucco forms, stepping back at
each floor and terminating in a small penthouse. Apparently this
basic form was derived, in part, so as not to obstruct the view
available from the existing house directly above and which
Thomas had designed a few years earlier. What would have been
an austere design is countered with a playful variety of windows,
porches, bay windows, archways, gable ends, chimneys, and
square tile motifs.

Before going up to the front door visitors should walk to the right
side of the house and pause to admire a beautiful example of
window design characteristic of the architect’s work. A grandiose
effect is achieved by tying together the living room windows
above with those of the music room below, capping the whole
with a simple, bold arch and parapet gable end and bringing
down on each side a cascade of articulated stucco bands.

A dramatically simple, triangular bay window directs one up the

stairs toward the front door, which is delineated by a projecting
archway. Once inside, the visitor is impressed, as was intended,
by an elegant stairway with two ample landings graced with
carved wooden paneling and abundant windows.

The interior wall finishes are of white plaster with all openings
cased in generous amounts of Australian Gumwood trim.
Particularly noteworthy are the French doors leading from the
living room down to the garden room, which was an addition
designed by Thomas six years later. The fireplace designs are
similar to those in the Wintermute house which have hammered
copper goods. However, here Thomas achieved an equally
graceful design by sculpturing the plaster material and adding
ubiquitous tile accents.
It appears that this house is still mostly as originally designed
except, perhaps, for the addition of the mirror over the dining
room fireplace. Notice, for example, the brass and white opal
glass light fixtures in the living room and dining room.

Note the original large grounds were subdivided a few years ago
to make room for other houses, one of which was designed by
Julia Morgan and was moved here from its original site.

Commentary by Helena Vilett

7. 227 Tunnel Road

(Enter on Vicente Road)

Wintermute House, 1913

(Residennce of David and Patricia Strauss)

The Wintermute House is a romantic and picturesque fantasy.

Steep gabled roofs, large projecting bays, intricate window
patterns, and thick parapet walls partly hidden by foliage create
an immediate and forceful image replete with associations and
overtones. The relentless traffic of Tunnel Road rushes by --
insisting on its present-day schedules -- while this stately
mansion with majestic winding paths and processions of stone
urns suggests the slower approach of coaches and horses, and
even of leisure itself. The house is from another era where as
many as seven servants lived in the separate carriage house
nearby and now gone is the butler's pantry and the special live-in
maid who attended only two young Marjorie Wintermute.

The Wintermute house was built in 1913 for Dr. and Mrs.
Wintermute. It was Mrs. Wintermute of the Culver-Bell family
(descendents of Alexander Graham Bell) who actually
commissioned Thomas to do the work. This house was one of
Thomas's biggest commissions and came in a period of his
assertive stucco structures designed in the “grand manner” -- a
period of obvious social striving and conspicuous aspirations. As
with many of Thomas' houses, the Wintermute house defies any
single stylistic classification. Many sources are identifiable: Tudor
and medieval references, Austrian secessionists and Roman
ornament, Prairie school, Gothic and Indian elements. In short,
the house is a virtual gamut of historical architecture transformed
into a complex composition obviously meant to dominate its site
and impress the visitor. It was this ability to control what could
easily have developed into a chaos of unrelated design elements
that defines Thomas' genius in this period of his work.

The Wintermute house is composed of grand spaces with much

ornate detail and lavish finishes. Its spatial organization is clear
and distinct. Major spaces around a central entry hall, with a
sense of expanding spaces yet to unfold. The entry hall is the
starting point and crossroads for all major spaces in the house.
In common central hall plans of this type, the entry space is two
stories high and includes the main staircase within this volume.
In the Wintermute house the central hall is one story high and
the main stair, a gracious 6 feet wide with large landings, wraps
around the central hall and this becomes a major “promenade”
with outdoor vistas at every turn. At the top of this stairway is
the upper hall from which it is possible to see not only the major
upper spaces, but also down into this two-story high
conservatory, with glimpses of living, dining and garden below.
The interior concept has thus been to visually connect the house
both horizontally and vertically. In doing so, however, Thomas
has gone out of his way to keep each space separate and
distinct, complete in itself -- which partly accounts for the
remarkable quality of restfulness and calm felt in each room.

The mood that pervades the Wintermute house is one of

spaciousness, variety, and the suggestion of ritual -- that the
events of everyday life are somewhat special. This mood is felt at
the onset in the complex sequence of approaches to the front
door and on the main stair, and in a similar manner in the dining
room, living room, master bedroom, study, and conservatory.
The conservatory is by far the “glorious” space of the house.
Here, in a virtually two-story glass enclosure looking out over the
garden and pool and with the sound of the fountain in the
projecting bay as a background, the ritual of four o'clock tea was
a reality until recent times. The sense of ritual and importance
was further heightened by Thomas's manipulation of scale --
making elements such as corbels and walls thicker and bigger
than they needed to be in order to convey the most convincing
impression.

The upper east wing was built for the Wintermute daughter,
Marjorie. It was over the design of this wing that the
Wintermutes had a falling out with Thomas, and some of it was
constructed over his objections. This dispute notwithstanding, the
wing is a child's fantasy -- with delicate plaster foliage on the
walls, small scaled doors, built-in roll down desk, watercolor wall
paintings by Mrs. Wintermute, and a bathroom designed to
charm the heart of any child.

The Wintermute house stayed in the family until the early 1940s.
As a child, Marjorie Wintermute had played often with her
favorite companion, Amy May. Amy grew up loving this house,
too, and vowed to someday own it. In the 1940’s as Mrs. Charles
Rose, she was to realize that dream, and she continued the four
o'clock tea ceremony she had always enjoyed with Marjorie. The
house now has its fourth owners, David and Patricia Strauss, who
have continued to sustain its original vitality while making
necessary improvements such as kitchen remodeling and the
even more timely addition of solar heating for all domestic hot
water.

When the Wintermute house was being completed, the world of

architecture was on the verge of "modern movement” which in
the 1920’s was to involve radical spatial experiments and
revolutionary aesthetics. In the midst of this period of upheaval,
John Hudson Thomas was to proceed from the Wintermute
house, with full conviction, to further develop a more thoroughly
consistent romantic medieval architecture.

Commentary by Jim Daniels