Hover House 3 by Glen Irani Architects
Glen Irani Architects have designed the third in their series of Hover Houses located on the Venice Canals of Los Angeles, California.
.
Description from Glen Irani Architects:
Situated on the Venice Canals of Los Angeles, California, Hover House 3 represents the third in the architects’ Hover House series. This series focuses on maximizing outdoor living on small lots by ‘hovering’ the building envelope above the grade level in order to create space for outdoor living environments. This series proposes that interior living space be reduced in favor of less resource-intensive outdoor living amenities. As material and labor costs increase in the coming decades, increasing outdoor functionality while decreasing indoor area in temperate climate zones is one solution to the rising cost and over-consumption of building resources.
While this 3-bedroom, 2-office, 2500 SF house already represents a substantial reduction in indoor floor area (about 25% from the norm), the inhabitants of this and two other Hover Houses (including the architect’s own house) enable us to study the effectiveness of this model and refine an approach to suit mainstream culture. Hover House 3 responds to the tight confines of it’s 32’,95’ lot on the Venice Canals with little pretense as a simple box elevated over the landscape that is fully programmed to facilitate all the functions of a living room, dining room and kitchen. The interior program for the same functions (which the client unfortunately could not be convinced to substantially forego) was reduced in floor area by over 50%.
The hope is that the Hover House concept takes root in the community as a practical model for exchanging built volumes with exterior living equivalents. Ultimately, the homeowners will dictate if the Hover House model can actually exclude the interior community areas to some degree, thus saving cost, resources and reducing the carbon footprint.
Sustainability Design:
Hover House 3 utilizes numerous sustainability-improved technologies. Embodied energy analysis on major systems resulted in the use of exterior man-made slate panels, exposed concrete walls and radiant hydronic heating and many of the finishes. Natural ventilation is carefully devised with proper window placements and a wind tower that extend 9’ above the roof (the max allowed by code) in order to eliminate air conditioning. Roof-mounted photovoltaic panels offset 80% of power demands. With the exception of interior wall paint, all interior finishes are devised to last indefinitely so that future emissions from finish replacements are minimized or eliminated.Other sustainability studies aimed specifically at reducing field application air and noise pollution, a little-recognized issue within the sustainability equation. The use of tar-free, cold-applied roofing and the panelized exterior which together eliminate significant amounts of field-construction noise, VOC and CO emissions.
Visit the Glen Irani Architects website – here.
.
.
TW on 30 Oct 2010 at 6:57 pm #
“The interior program for the same functions (which the client unfortunately could not be convinced to substantially forego) was reduced in floor area by over 50%.”
If I am reading this correctly (why, oh, why do architects attempt to intelletualise their language to the point of illegibility??), these houses attempt to minimise the interior spaces in the hope that exterior living spaces will be utlised more thus bringing the carbon footprint down.
Commendable.
In this case, the client could not be convinced to reduce their living/dining/kitchen further.
Understandable.
By the architect has it wrong. It isn’t the communal areas that need reducing in a modern house. If we viewed the energy use/carbon footprint on a per usage basis, then we can forgive extra footprint in the communal areas.
It is instead the private areas that are the problem. 3 bathrooms, 2 offices, 4 (yes 4!!) bathrooms, massive bedrooms, walk-in robes are not essential. This is where the largest carbon footprint lies because these are the least used spaces in a house.
Perhaps next time start your argument for energy efficiency and sustainability in these rooms.
Ana on 30 Oct 2010 at 8:03 pm #
Excelente!
alberto on 30 Oct 2010 at 8:10 pm #
In Miami some of us “maximize outdoor living on small lots” by using the rooftop as deck space. The views, breeze, and privacy make this level unique in an urban setting. (Incidentally, photovoltaics could be arrayed to provide shade on the roof). Duplicating the indoor living room on the ground with an outdoor living room doesn’t “exchange” anything at all, anyway.
After reading the architect’s description about reducing carbon footprint, I am curious about the decision to abandon any pretense of a pedestrian entrance, of a link to the sidewalk. The entire house frontage is devoted to vehicular use. Doesn’t anyone here walk to the store? bike to the beach? talk with their neighbors? When you provide garage parking for three cars, do you become an enabler?
I like modern buildings, and I design modern buildings in traditional neighborhoods (and they’re all traditional neighborhoods), but I respect the social context. Style is not the issue. Corbu did an urban single family house in Buenos Aires, and it is worth researching.
I find this house “hovers” indeed, that it is an antisocial object intentionally isolated from its milieu. Technical success does not translate to good design. Nice going on the energy conservation, though.
marshen on 30 Oct 2010 at 11:13 pm #
I have never seen a house with such an excessive amount of recessed can lighting. What is going on there?
Sash on 31 Oct 2010 at 3:59 pm #
I second that marshen – the amount of down lights is massive! They might be fluorescent to safe energy, but I doubt it.
Glen Irani on 31 Oct 2010 at 10:42 pm #
@TW – reduction of floor area in all rooms obviously helps reduce carbon footprint, but you wouldn’t call any of the spaces in this house ‘large’. Keep in mind that this is a 2500 SF house with all those rooms shown in the plans. The two office are 100% necessary and very important for car trip-count reduction.
In this climate, the idea of outdoor living doesn’t translate well to sleeping areas. It’s too cool, humid and even dangerous here at night – so genuine shelter is required for sleeping. In a more rural setting, perhaps a little farther from the marine fog, I’d love to explore outdoor sleeping areas more.
@Alberto – Unlike Miami,rooftop decks so close to the beach are unused here due to cold, brisk ocean breezes and the fact that they are inconveniently two levels above the community interior spaces. This house has a roof terrace as well, however, at the insistence of the client who now agrees it wasn’t necessary. Outdoor living at the grade level promotes a much stronger connection to the community (serious concerns of us both) and the garden (definitely my concern.)
Contrary to your comment about antisocial design aspects of this house, the garage fronts on an alley (with almost no public parking available or pedestrian sidewalk) and the outdoor living area and entrance fronts on the pedestrian promenade of the canals where everyone enters and where community socializing is very common. Pedestrians truly enjoy and are very interested in this house and frequently engage my clients across the fence. In my clients’ own words, impromptu ‘over the fence’ socializing is so much more frequent in the outdoor living area than in their previous traditional canal-side house. And finally, Albert, Venice is a very pedestrian urban village. So yes, we do walk to a lot of places here.
Your engagement of this project reminds me how dangerous it is to present a project in such a limited format. Often the critic in us lashes out despite our very limited understanding of a project. I would recommend that you pose your concerns as questions rather than harsh, authoritative criticisms. I do, however, appreciate that you obviously took the time to think about this project. It would be great if all the viewers put as much thought into their observations as you did, but voiced them in a way that promotes productive discussion. That, to me, is the most important outcome of the information age and public forums like this one.
@Marshen – There are indeed a lot of recessed can lights. We’ve found that the power consumption of more lights with lower wattage bulbs and efficient dimmers is less than with the typical grid spacing of cans. Additionally, the light quality is warmer and the lights can be located specifically where needed. The light spread is also much better so you don’t need to crank up the watts for effective lighting. Of course, we’re all looking forward to the coming of color-correct high-efficacy fixures and retrofit bulbs (and it will not be long!)
Thanks for checking out the project everyone.
Nico on 01 Nov 2010 at 7:50 am #
I like the project overall, but I agree with TW that 4 bathrooms are not an eco-friendly approach… This may have been the owner’s request, though, so I shall not blame it on the architect.
One master bathroom (I’d rather do it a bit smaller) plus one common bathroom for the kids and (optionally) the toilet/washer near the kitchen at the first level would save $$, space and water.
The 3-car garage is not necessarily for 3 cars. I would use it for ONE car plus many bicycles, surfboards and maybe even a sailing dinghy!!
Matthew @ Slow Home on 01 Nov 2010 at 10:26 am #
I think some of the comments are a tad harsh as well. I think the house is innovative and quite beautiful – I think the kitchen detailing and palette in that area is really well done, the concrete block and then extending the millwork and integrating the fireplace composes the whole space really well.
Brett Jones on 02 Nov 2010 at 12:11 am #
Dear Glen,
Overall welcoming and elegant home with simple but effective palette of materials that seem ideal to its environment (both urban and climatic). As an interested consumer of architectural and building services over the years I think you have matched sustainable ideas with the clients needs/preferences.
Questions:
1. Have any of your Hover houses utilised roof top space for garden/vegetable patch using recycled grey water and rainwater and providing composting facilities etc? (?even a composting toilet for “off the grid” survival during flooding etc).
2. may I ask what is the exterior cladding you used for the walls near the stairs to ground level? What type of insulation did you use underneath cladding?
regards
Brett
Jat on 02 Nov 2010 at 7:10 am #
Really…got enough recessed lighting there to choke a horse
markf on 03 Nov 2010 at 10:59 pm #
This is a beautiful project. However, the lighting is overkill!
unaiscyber on 23 Nov 2010 at 2:37 am #
Superb