Comments on: The Perforated House by Kavellaris Urban Design

By: Indah

Indah — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 23:50:07 +0000

Amazing!

By: kri kri

kri kri — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:14:23 +0000

wow cool the inside!!!!!!!!!i think that the exterior must be more real:)

By: Rudy

Rudy — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 19:56:12 +0000

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.

By: stephen

stephen — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 02:00:11 +0000

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.

By: Liam

Liam — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 07:26:41 +0000

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

By: Architecture Student

Architecture Student — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:30:12 +0000

That’s some fine archi-babble.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:30:06 +0000

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).

By: Sheryl

Sheryl — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:27:30 +0000

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!

By: Khalil

Khalil — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:53:13 +0000

I love the interior not the exterior .its very good worck from inside he utilized the space very will .

By: Raztus

Raztus — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 23:37:12 +0000

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).

By: Speedmaster

Speedmaster — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:42:36 +0000

Freaky exterior, but VERY cool!

By: Jason

Jason — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:40:42 +0000

NOW THAT IS WEIRD

By: Carl

Carl — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:00:33 +0000

Talk about pushing the building envelope…

By: another urban designer

another urban designer — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:42:22 +0000

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.

By: ollimonster

ollimonster — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 07:59:59 +0000

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.

By: JT

JT — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:54:50 +0000

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.

By: janji

janji — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:27:32 +0000

i love it!!

By: Lance

Lance — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:05:38 +0000

One word… Fun. But that backyard mural is a little creepy.

By: shlog

shlog — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 12:42:37 +0000

Architecture as ‘practical joke’.

By: Rudy

Rudy — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 11:06:33 +0000

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.