House M / Marc Koehler Architects

Jan 2009

Uploaded by Nico Saieh — Filed under: Houses ,Selected , Marc Koehler Architects, The Netherlands

▼

Add this to My Bookmarks:

share by email

share by email

Architects: Marc Koehler Architects
Location: Almere, Netherlands
Design Team: Kasia Heijerman, Filip Bosscher, Dick Kleijn
Client: Marion van Leeuwen
Advisers: KKB Heemskerk, Brouwer & kok
Contractor: Goldewijk
Project year: 2005
Budget: US $454,440
Constructed Area: 230 sqm
Photographs: Allard van der Broek

House M is a contemporary response to a changing cultural environment in the Netherlands which is characterized by a growing demand for monumentality, solidity and enclosure as dominant aesthetic values to be expressed in the architecture of the private house.

In response to this, we positioned the house as it were a wall between front and back garden, separating a very introverted street façade from a very extroverted garden façade (on the back of the house). The kitchen, dining room, living room and office space are located on the ground floor in a continuous space which opens-up towards the sunny back garden. On the second floor, three intimate bedrooms, storage-space and bathroom are located.

On the street side, the house appears rather closed and monolithic. Two volumes reach out from this mass in an expressive way, providing the entrance and the garage space, defining the sculptural monumental image of the house as seen from the street, creating an interesting visual dialogue with the neighboring houses built in neo-classical style.

: site plan

: ground floor plan

: first floor plan

: south elevation

: section

: diagram

Cite:
Saieh , Nico . "House M / Marc Koehler Architects" 23 Jan 2009. ArchDaily. Accessed 09 Feb 2012. <http://www.archdaily.com/12336>

Comments (13)
Tweets (3)
Links to this entry (4)

Rocket Valentino says:

“House M is a contemporary response to a changing cultural environment in the Netherlands which is characterized by a growing demand for monumentality, solidity and enclosure as dominant aesthetic values to be expressed in the architecture of the private house.”

Huh?

Why camouflage the obvious response towards street in such a ridiculous language? I would assume that at least 90% of people building a villa want it to be open towards the garden and closed towards the street…

I don’t understand the diagram with the colours, either. Please enlighten me! I’m merely a daft student…

That being said, I think they have gotten a lot out of just $450′ (assuming that includes the plot). I thought real estate (particularly villas) were immensly expensive in Holland?

Thank you, archdaily, for showing us so many projects from around the world! It’s a great inspiration!

# January 23, 2009 at 10:27

Carlo says:

They definetely fell in the postmodernism trap!!
Horrible how the volume of the staisr cuts into the dining space!
Not to mention that dividing wall, that destroys the generosity that the dining area could have had.
That would be the worst ikea kitchen i’ ve seen in a long time.

# January 23, 2009 at 11:14

I think the dividing wall creates an intimacy to the dining area, and separates it nicely from the entrance area. Totally agree on the volume above this wall, though…

Who’s interested in -isms, anyway?

# January 23, 2009 at 11:56

The dividing wall is an intervention to alleviate the pain, that the badly placed entrance causes to the dining area.
And lets ignore the first floor plan…

# January 23, 2009 at 12:12

test says:

I like the steps out front.

# January 23, 2009 at 14:18

Hehe, good point, C. :-)

# January 23, 2009 at 14:41

C.P.T.L. says:

I have hesitated to air these comments which I assembled about a month ago; I like architects and architecture and have been unwilling to be a harsh messenger. But seeing Rocket Valentino’s comment there, well, here it is.

The following comments do not apply to this entry alone, but are of a general nature, applying to many, perhaps the majority of Archdaily entries:

Most unfortunately in the field of architecture, plain description has become displaced by extraordinarily self-conscious flights of language replete with inane word twists and juxtapositions and those who would appreciate a design must suffer foolishness masquerading as importance, along with the photos of the thing itself. If a picture is worth a thousand words, and the website allows some dozen or so of them, why muck it all up with this absurdity? And believe me, it is absurd.

Few, if any of the entries here at ArchDaily come without some measure of it, and it is a source of continual wincing amazement to me that architects, who are artists, of all people, would allow or even encourage the immaterial addition of anything at all to the plain, quiet appreciation of a design. Who is better equipped than a painter, sculptor or architect to understand that, once a creation is brought into existence, the thing itself speaks for itself and is its own best testament?

Since we all cannot witness each of these buildings first hand, the ‘lens’ through which we take them, here at ArchDaily, a website, is photos and words. So, in short: let’s have as many pictures as possible, especially of the buildings during construction; and more facts – as many as possible, with no wordiness.

# January 23, 2009 at 15:31

Thank you, C.P.T.L.

Yes.

# January 24, 2009 at 15:49

hj says:

I like the project. It’s a good starting point, the architect’s first built commission (for his parents I believe). The play of volumes is interesting and shows a differentiated building from all angles. The colour diagram is ,in my opinion, about the different colour atmospheres in the different parts of the house and how this resonate outwards. If you see this project in its normal grey cloudy context, I think it works rather well.

# January 24, 2009 at 16:21

Keomi says:

Very nice building but why take the photos of the building when the landscape isn’t even installed let alone established? The planting is part of the setting of the building and should not be treated as bit of frill around the edges.

# January 27, 2009 at 18:43

Tyler says:

Thanks C.P.T.L.

I enjoyed your soundoff. Also, you write in a way that reading it makes me feel like the still moments of laying down after a day in the ocean. After each woosh is a good, sturdy point that, much like the tide, sucks in and then outwardly displays yet another good sturdy point. I might read a novel by you if I didn’t suffer from easy motion sickness.

# February 17, 2009 at 21:41

I also dislike the Pergo flooring, or rather the bad installation of it; the joints show and belie their claim. If you *must* use Pergo, install it gently. That way, the joints dont upfold. How an architect could allow such a simple and avoidable downfall, I do not know. What happened to honesty in materials?

# February 17, 2009 at 21:49

richie says: