The Perforated House by Kavellaris Urban Design
Kavellaris Urban Design (KUD) have designed the Perforated House in Melbourne, Australia.
Full description after the photos….














The Perforated House by Kavellaris Urban Design
This project to us is a platform to establish a critical dialogue within our built environment; to raise questions as much as it is to finding solutions. The project is a critique on our cultural attitudes and how we determine them. A critique on what we consider to be of heritage significance and how to narrate such ideas in a critical and contemporary manner.
This once vacant site is nestled at the eastern bookend between a row of single fronted Victorian terraces and a double fronted Edwardian weatherboard house.
Our strategy was to critique and respond to our ongoing research into the Terrace typology. The built form is essentially an urban infill within a 5.5×14.4m envelope. The perforated house is our response to establish an alternative language to the accepted notion of our cultural attitude towards critical questions of identity and heritage.
We wanted the house to be more than just a facade. More than just a message or a graphic stuck to a building. Our building was not an urban canvas paying tribute to Venturi’s “decorated shed”, instead the external facade could be experienced internally and is also a multi functional device that constantly transforms the built form from solid to void, from private to public, from opaque to translucent. By day the building is heavy and reflective and by night inverting into a soft translucent permeable light box. The operable wall or the absence of the facade enabled us to remove the idea that houses are static.
The use of operable walls, doors, curtains and glass walls enables the occupants to change the experience and environment. This architectural manipulation of space blurred the boundaries between inside and outside, the public and private realm. The manipulated spaces overlapped and borrowed the amenity and context of it’s surrounding environment.
The plan inverts the traditional terrace program with the active living zones on the first floor opening onto a north facing terrace thereby generating a primary northerly orientation to a south facing block. The perforated house incorporates passive sustainable interventions by orientating north glass bifolds doors and louvers for cross ventilation as the primary means of cooling. In addition, solar hot water and 5 star rated sanitary ware fixtures were incorporated. The north facing terrace redefines the “aussie” backyard reinforced by the childlike mural reminiscing on a past era and making commentary on the changing demography of the family unit and ultimately the inner city house typology.
Visit the website of Kavellaris Urban Design – here.
.
.

Rudy on 16 Aug 2009 at 4:06 am #
Think the solution for blending in with the other houses is sympathetic but too superficial. It stays predominant a square block from the front.
Those neighborhoods in Melbourne are very lovely. Albert Park where I lived for a while has few modern buildings and that’s for the better. It has such unique character it would be a shame to intersperse it with modern houses.
shlog on 16 Aug 2009 at 5:42 am #
Architecture as ‘practical joke’.
Lance on 16 Aug 2009 at 7:05 am #
One word… Fun. But that backyard mural is a little creepy.
janji on 16 Aug 2009 at 7:27 am #
i love it!!
JT on 16 Aug 2009 at 3:54 pm #
I thought that the world have moved on from post modernism like fluorescent hot pants but obviously not in Melbourne. This is like a printed-boob-apron.
ollimonster on 17 Aug 2009 at 12:59 am #
This is thinking outside the box. Here in Australia we are governed by Council regulations that require owners of Post War and Victorian houses to retain the original “character” of these houses even though there is a over abundance of them. This design, whilst forward thinking, allows for the owners to build their dream home and still appease the Councils and the regulations. More Councils round Australia should be more open minded and embrace change. Fantastic job.
another urban designer on 17 Aug 2009 at 5:42 am #
it is a statement more than it is a home. it is illustrating that we cannot just build replicas of victorian houses to fit in with the neighbourhood character, because they are not victorian! It is a cry out that we cannot recreate what once was, we need to move on for this, but under the current restrictions we must adhere to the character restrains. and this is an example of ‘breaking’ the rules.
Carl on 17 Aug 2009 at 7:00 am #
Talk about pushing the building envelope…
Jason on 17 Aug 2009 at 9:40 am #
NOW THAT IS WEIRD
Speedmaster on 17 Aug 2009 at 11:42 am #
Freaky exterior, but VERY cool!
Raztus on 17 Aug 2009 at 4:37 pm #
I am not sure about this. I like the fact that the facade can be dynamic, but then I would not want every one looking directly in my whole house. You would have to be OCD to live here. I feel sorry for the kid, this is not a child friendly space (hard stone floors, no garden or place to play/hide).
Khalil on 18 Aug 2009 at 3:53 am #
I love the interior not the exterior .its very good worck from inside he utilized the space very will .
Sheryl on 18 Aug 2009 at 7:27 am #
Melbourne would provide limited time to have the house ‘open’ unless your a polar bear lol. We need to break away a little from the ‘Hide behind/in my facade/home mentality and get beck to more open community living and sharing.There are obviously private spaces as well This is one boob apron I would happily slip mine into!
Chris on 18 Aug 2009 at 9:30 am #
I agree with “another urban designer” with the fact that it’s more of a statement than a house. The interior seems very well planned out, using introverted design principles and sleek modern furniture. I love the thinking behind the project, but don’t know if i really like the front facade. I think there could be some better alternatives to having the planar, bland facade (although I do find it quite intriguing–and it gets its statement across well).
Architecture Student on 18 Aug 2009 at 8:30 pm #
That’s some fine archi-babble.
Liam on 19 Aug 2009 at 12:26 am #
looks cold and characterless inside kind of like a boutique designer handbag store, I agree poor luck to that kid living in such a clinically clean space..the front is cool but then nothing amazing, I imagine it would get old quickly…i’d rather live in the house either side…sorry, just my opinion
stephen on 20 Aug 2009 at 7:00 pm #
Rudy, the real shame is that modern can still be equated with something that is bad and that creative thought & action is not encouraged. Its an example of architectural commentary, that gets you, us, everyone thinking. Whether we happen to like it is immaterial (it was designed for for someone else remember). Anything that moves us away from the leaden need to be ’sympathetic’ to ‘lovely’ old buildings has my support.
Rudy on 21 Aug 2009 at 12:56 pm #
Stephen, I appreciate your comment. I myself favor well designed contemporary buildings above almost anything from the past that does not meet modern standards.
Coming from Europe this Melbourne neighboorhood struck me as a ‘lovely’ place indeed. Spacious, quiet and leafy streets that looked like something from Ducktown. I haven’t seen that much of Australia and are ignorant of the abundance of these houses, as ‘ollimonster’ mentioned. Understandably you don’t want to rebuild ruined Victorian or Edwardian houses but move forward and replace them with modern housing.
Yet, the effort of this particular house to communicate with the surrounding architecture is not very inspiring. Not even as a statement.
Our comment is not to put forward our own likings but trying to add a constructive contribution to the architectural debate.
kri kri on 21 Sep 2009 at 7:14 am #
wow cool the inside!!!!!!!!!i think that the exterior must be more real:)
Indah on 12 Dec 2009 at 4:50 pm #
Amazing!