I mentioned to Esherick House and Double House in my previous post and how my references from that two shaped my design principles for the house project, in detail. In short, I decided to use the double house idea “ a line combining and separating two different volumes (which I decided as individual and common spaces)” in combination with the organisation of Esherick House.
So the scheme turned out to be like this. I have service and served spaces. In my case service space is the circulation area. And I have served spaces divided by the circulation area as being individual and common.
And later Atrium House entered into my design to combine my separate spaces in combination with the interlocking spaces idea i derived from the Double House. Until this point it was all I did for the previous pre-jury. So, what are the recent developments in my project?
I re-analysed the Atrium House by Erkut Şahinbaş and noticed that in Atrium House the circulation areas are all open spaces while the living areas are enclosed. This gave me a chance to work with open-enclosed space relationships in three dimension. As in Atrium House I left my circulation areas open to express the organisation more. While working with this open and enclosed spaces I found out that at some points my circulation areas were gaining more spatial characters where people can spent time. So I defined them as semi-open spaces. Such as the atrium space on the ground floor.
So, the new scheme is that I have open circulation areas and enclosed served spaces. yet at the points where the circulation areas gain room-like characters (being more than a corridor) they become semi enclosed.
The house is located on the slope of a craggy suburban hillside having a clear vista through the city below.
The house is centered around the atrium as it can bu understood from the plan drawings.
The divsion of individual and common spaces in section:
Elevation drawings: (open-enclosed space relation in 3d can be read from elevation drawings.)