datant des années 1930 a été gardé, en contraste avec l’ouverture, la continuité spatiale et l’abstraction de l’ajout. La plus grande part de l’énergie dégagée par ce projet se démarque entre les lignes de ces deux parties. Tandis que les vieilles pièces sont perçues comme étant introverties et distinctes de l’extérieur, les
nouvelles pièces sont reliées au paysage par l’entremise d’une fine voile d’aluminium et de verre. L’ajout a des liens évidents avec le terrain et le ciel, les vues multiples et les limites imprécises. Bien que ce dernier serve d’enclave banli- eusarde, la maison marque aussi une perspective d’une condition sociale de transformation. En
tant que tel, le projet est une contre-proposition à la
double immodestie des nouvelles maisons bourgeoises qui viennent rehausser le statu quo économique et les inventions architecturales extrémistes qui manquent de respect envers le milieu social établi.
are seen diagonally from the foyer. The long front to back axis is marked at the kitchen by built-in cabinets and a figural ceiling that slopes down to the seam between the old and new. This spatial compression introduced by the ceiling is lifted as it rises back up to a light-chimney where a corner- glazed clerestory offers views of trees and sky. Under this upsweeping ceiling is a 14-foot-long granite table that serves functionally as a kitchen counter, socially as a focus of family life and spatially as a centre from which the addition radiates. Inside the addition itself, rooms intertwine with adjacent rooms and the outside — a further articulation of the seam. Floors, ceilings and materials that continue from inside to out. Floor-to-ceiling windows barely define a distinction between conditioned and unconditioned space. The yard, which so often is simply framed as other to a house, is integrally involved with the life inside the building. Untraditional construction enhances particular spatial qualities: steel pro- vides the rigidity needed for open corners and expanses of glass; a seemingly frameless window emphasizes the massiveness of a limestone wall and the connection to the outside. A Vierendeel truss in the den lends an uncanny thinness to the roof and cantilevered courses of brick integrate lightness into the stoicism of the existing structure.
A modern, open sensibility in the addition is a counterpoint to the contained space in the original building. Older rooms are experienced as internal — as distinct from the outside — while the new rooms are linked to the landscape through a thin veil of aluminum and glass. The addition has clear relationships to the ground and the sky, multiple views, and indistinct boundaries. While it serves its suburban enclave, the house also marks a perspective on a social condition in transformation, between the propriety of the front and the open engagement of the back. This approach leaves the ensemble decidedly unresolved, woven together but separate. As one passes between the old and new construction, the confluence of two distinct architectural characters gives rise to ques - tions about the various ways in which architecture both challenges and reinforces the culture of which it is a part. The project’s inconspicuous prospect from the street and its integration of two fully respected architectural idioms offers an architectural solution that is critically engaged in both architectural and social dimensions.
Kevin Alter teaches in Austin,Texas and has a practice, alterstudio , which has received several design awards in the United States.
S ewing
O n S ite review
33
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator