Hearing the Heart - Case Study Summit

In 1945, John Entenza, the editor and publisher of Arts & Architecture magazine, founded the Case Study House program, with the goal of adapting wartime era technologies and materials into architecturally radical, mass produced, middle class homes. Now, eighty years later, the devastation caused by the Eaton and Palisades fires of 2025 has called again for radical housing solutions. Many groups have stepped forward with ideas for rebuilding in ways that could address affordability, resiliency and connecting to lost heritage.

Two initiatives, however, have explicitly invoked Entenza's farsighted program: Case Study: Adapt™ , co-founded by Leo Seigal and Dustin Bramell, in partnership with the Eames Foundation, and Architectural Digest; and Case Study 2.0, launched by Crest Real Estate. So what are the shared goals of these programs, their differences, and what do they have in common with Entenza’s visionary effort? FORT: LA got answers from leaders and architects from these programs at the “Case Study Summit,” the sixth conversation in the series Heart of LA: Straight Talk About Building Back.

The conversation started with explainers about the programs. Bramell, who lost his own home on Chautauqua Boulevard, said he and Seigal assembled a list of ten architects they believed embodied the original program’s inspired take on Modernism, including Johnston Marklee, Bestor Architects, Marmol Radziner, and Geoffrey von Oeyen. They then connected architects to homeowners who they felt were in sync with the original mission – not people “seeking a 9000 square foot house.” While Bramell said they tried to set a price per square foot for everyone, but generally left the pairs to forge their own contract and cost level.

If Case Study: Adapt was aimed at creating bespoke homes, the goal for Case Study 2.0 was mass producibility, explained Alison MacCracken, Pacific Palisades Community Liaison for Crest. Crest’s founders, the brothers Jason and Steven Somers, are expert in permitting and expediting building projects, and their goal was to solicit designs that could become City-approved standard plans.

They cast a wide net, tapping 100 architects “in their Rolodex” from Los Angeles and beyond, including founding participant Chad Oppenheim, Morphosis, SPF:architects, Office of Mobile Design and, again, Marmol Radziner. They asked for renderings of a project that met a high level of fire and climate resiliency and could be built for $500-800 per square foot, to reach the mid-level household. Most importantly, said MacCracken, “We basically just said, make it beautiful.”  A homeowner who selects a Case Study 2.0 plan would then pay a fixed fee for drawings. WHile MacCracken says Crest does not require clients to use Crest as an expeditor, she says “many of the architects may hire us to process the plans through the city.”  

The original program delivered a relatively uniform aesthetic, with most of the 25 Case Study houses featuring open plans, exposed structure of steel and glass, and modular and prefabricated components. Uniformity is not the goal of ‘Adapt or 2.0, though they echo Entenza in forging relationships with materials suppliers and manufacturers. Companies offering discounts on products for Case Study 2.0 include ​​Fleetwood windows and doors, Wolf and Sub-Zero kitchen appliances, Eco Outdoor and more, said MacCracken. Case Study: Adapt has teamed up with Fisher & Paykel appliances and Heath Ceramics, among others. However, Bramell pointed out that one of his goals is to figure out ways to integrate newer, unknown materials by a “whole other category of firms that you probably have never heard of unless you're super deep in the resilience world.”  

Case Study: Adapt program participant Nicholas Hofstede, Managing Director at Johnston Marklee, pointed out that since the postwar years, technology has completely changed, as have energy needs, and land-use, in terms of density and reach into the Wildland Urban Interface. So architects in both programs have had to factor in new restrictions, such as creating a plant-free buffer around houses known as Zone Zero, as well as new opportunities for multigenerational living and climate resilience. “We've tried to provide a baseline from a climate standpoint,” said Welling, adding that as architects, “we just see it as a given that you should be recycling rainwater.”

Attendees were curious about what these programs were doing that were different from the other fire rebuilding initiatives out there, such as the Foothill Catalog and a “California Classics” range of plans pending from the group Save Iconic Architecture. While those generally bring back past styles, for the Case Study program teams, “the intention behind both of these incredible initiatives is to give something wonderful back to the homeowner that they probably never even knew they could feel or have,” said MacCracken.