ORDOS 100 #18: I|K Studio

Feb 2009

By Nico Saieh — Filed under: Houses , China, I|K Studio, Ordos 100

This villa is located in plot #55 of the ORDOS project.

Architects: I|K studio – Mariana Ibanez, Simon Kim
Location: Ordos, Inner Mongolia, China
Project team: Chris Shusta, Anthony Dimari, Juta Cinco, Aimee Epstein, Michael Powers, Elizabeth Bishop, Carnaven Chiu
Structural Consultant: Paul Kassabian
Design year: 2008
Construction year: 2009
Curator: Ai Weiwei, Beijing, China
Client: Jiang Yuan Water Engineering Ltd, Inner Mongolia, China
Constructed Area: 1,000 sqm aprox

4-2-1 HOUSE

Our design strategy begins with the articulation of the landscape in a system of terraces bound by measurement. All edges are vectors that have an origin, direction and magnitude. As such, they can be used to process a third vector that is a cross-product. The derived verticals are not only markers of mathematical models but are here used as a design tool.

An extension of the vector cross-product, the house is a collection of terraced fields that adhere to the programmatic elements of the 1000sqm house; composed in a specific manner to allow for a serial unfolding of tableaux that generate views of the house in a cinematic sequence. House 4-2-1 is composed in a movement of four to two to one that progress from the ground where there are 4 separate towers that climb upwards to two towers, and combine into the final, single level. This simple system of bifurcation is amplified by the programmatic divisions that challenge the organization of a typical house.

: situation plan

: diagram

: floor plans

: sections

14 comments »

provecho says:

I’m not a huge fan of the faceted architecture trend, but this example is quite elegant. Arbitrary, but elegant.

# February 13, 2009 at 02:17

DM_A says:

Well, but…arbitrary? What’s not arbitrary in architecture?
I mean…who said a straight angle is not arbitrary? I think, in fact, that orthogonal geometry is quite more abstract and hard to find in nature (even crystals, the most perfect geometries in nature aren’t perfectly squared, but complex combinations of angles). So, it’s maybe a matter of “geometrical culture” … i’m just thinking aloud so we can discuss this deeply…
Anyway, I like this example, very elegant in its presentation, though I’d like to see it built to test it’s spaces.

# February 13, 2009 at 04:52

Creator says:

For me this house is with fantastic shape and I like it.For folding and arbitary i can say one thing – our planet surface looks arbitary with its foldings but we live on it and like it :)

# February 13, 2009 at 05:35

flip says:

i think the pool area is similar to libeskind’s westside mall..

# February 13, 2009 at 05:58

tchouah says:

Nature abey to some very simples laws, gravity symetrie(sometimes) …etc
In nature, organical structures have their laws and still stay all différents. But nothing’s arbitrary, it’s all about evolution.

Building are artificial.
What are building laws?
Imite nature?
Easy to build?
Emotions ?
Rationality?

# February 13, 2009 at 07:02

tchouah says: “In nature, organical structures have their laws and still stay all différents. But nothing’s arbitrary, it’s all about evolution.
Building are artificial.”

I disagree in the last point. I tend to think it this way: Human beings are part of Nature, I think it’s a huge mistake to put ourselves apart/beyond Nature and its rules. So, as part of it, everything we do/build is part of it too.
A bird’s nest is artificial? I don’t think so. So why a “human nest” is considered artificial?

It’s all about evolution, as you said. So if we humans evolve, so do our products, don’t you think?

# February 13, 2009 at 07:14

tchouah – our architecture also can have evolution.And landscape,geographic terrain,environment etc…. and organic forms are two different things.

# February 13, 2009 at 07:58

Bo says:

Уж извините, но эта хрень начинает раздражать, что не дом, то мятая безвкусная коробка.

# February 13, 2009 at 10:58

JCC says:

I completely agree with Bo

# February 13, 2009 at 11:17

mil says:

More and more shapes without meaning…….. whitout funtional concepts……… all is exterior…. looks like out of season shop…….. were is the modern home identity here………

please mister arquitects think a little more in people and less in playboys.

# February 13, 2009 at 19:08

claude says: