House 42 / DesignQ

© Sri & Max /

Architects: DesignQ
Location: Banashankari, Bangalore,
Client: Mr. & Mrs. Prashanth
Structural Engineer: Arunachala.K.S
Civil Contractors: Sristi Constructions
Site Area: (4.5meters. X 10.5meters) 47.25 sqm
Built up area: 144 sqm
Budget: Rs. 25 Lakhs
Project Year: 2009
Photographs: Sri & Max / designQ

A dream home of Mr. and Mrs. Prashanth, a young software professional couple, who wanted a simple yet elegant contemporary design for a medium budget scheme, for the site size of 15’ X 34’6”.

The Site was abutted by Low income houses on either sides, with a medium width approach road. This 1550 Square feet house was achieved in three levels. Ground level for closed 7’ ht. Car parking, First Level with a Bed room for their parents, Living, Kitchen, Modern Puja room, Common Toilet and a Utility closer to kitchen and the Second Level with Two bed rooms and Attached toilets.

floor plans

Though it was a small site, we worked on a open type planning with a judicious use of skylites as it was not possible to provide windows on longer side of the house because of abutments on either sides. Only source of ventilation was from front and rear sides, Challenge was to achieve Maximum use of plot, providing abundant natural lighting and ventilation.

© Sri & Max / designQ

Our main intention was to have a sense of large space in a small house, which again has to be clean and airy.
The exernal façade of the house is just 15’ wide and treated with locally available strip sone cladding on a linear Grid, rest wih two windos and a butched glass opening. The top most portion of the stone cladded surface houses the over head water tank.

© Sri & Max / designQ

Internal Spaces are given a modern touch with simple furniture design which is a combination of dark brown and white colored veneers and laminates, complimented with Light green polished kutney stone with dark green marble bands as patterns for the flooring. The Puja room is done with a truncated pyramid roof , with a skylite at the top. Though it looks ethnic the use of Glass partition, glass door, Planter box makes it look modern, Thus making it a perfect blend of ancient and modern architecture. The vertical circulation from first level to second level happens with a chain link RCC stairs with natural polished Teak wood flooring and from second level to terrace level with M.S. stairs with wooden planks for the treads.

Cite: "House 42 / DesignQ" 06 Mar 2010. ArchDaily. Accessed 23 Jul 2014. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=51722>

35 comments

  1. Thumb up Thumb down +2

    Oh dear… what a mess in a country where Khan and Corbusier did great things.

  2. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    I think the only thing that I find interesting with this project is the floor plan. They did manage to squeeze a lot into a tight space; although not as elegantly as we see our friends in Japan do when confronted with similar constraints.

    That’s about it.

    The rest is just a confused jumble of elements, details, and materials that leave me with a slight hint of motion sickness.

    I wish we could do projects this small in my city of Los Angeles, where everyone seems to want a McMansion with 5 bedrooms, 3 car garages, and on and on.

  3. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    “ancient and modern architecture” ??? I suppose the architect is not very clear about the whole thing. By extensive use of material and geometry just makes it an object and not architecture. It becomes architecture only when social performativity is enacted. The term “judicious use of skylight”, is fake in the first place. As there are no sectional overlaps, the skylight is treated as a light well(tunnel). And this skylight does not do much to the space, it does not traverse through the building, It is placed at one corner of the edifice. I understand the constraints, but that is not a good enough reason to produce such a BAD architecture.

    • Thumb up Thumb down 0

      ‘It becomes architecture only when social performativity is enacted’….Is this your definition of architecture?
      See you point when it comes to the use of geometry etc., but ‘social performativity’?

  4. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Lol at emergence toilet on the ground floor. How do they wash their hands?

    this is kitsch

  5. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    well.. I will direct my reply to the moderators of this site….

    The worst ever project to feature on this site. I would like to know the reasons why this project was featured. The way I analyse it is..

    1. Poor structural and Architectural sense(The fiber water tank??!?!).
    2. Bad documentation of site (Watch how the Fake bamboo is positioned in some of the pics, the wires dangling without light fixtures)
    3. Unwanted attention on the details which should have never been in he first place.
    4. Confused material palette.

    Then there are many, but I guess I better stop at this point, coz this could go on and on …

    • Thumb up Thumb down 0

      For the life of me, I cannot follow the negative fuss this design has generated. This is, for sure, no masterpiece, but where are the critics of the all-too-frequent banal and often intentionally bizarre (and ugly) work we find on a daily basis? I find grotesque works which assault their environment, whatever and wherever the environment, and hear not a peep of outrage. For my part, I come to this site to see the 5-10%, which can be of exceedingly high standards–and nowadays 5-10% quality is nothing to sneeze at.

  6. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    How many are suppose to live here? Why would they want so many rooms if they don’t even have enough space to eat??

  7. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Yuk! What’s this doing here.It’s an apology for Indian architecture & architects. Please remove this from here. I have seen better designs by Indian firms like Cadence, etc. This is just a publicity stunt by a fresher I guess.

    Young man you have a lot to learn as well as get a better camera with more resolution.

    All the best for your future works. Let this failure be a stepping stone in your career.

    Regards.

  8. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Seems the local regulations allow to use the whole plot without patios or voids . That’s scary.

    P.S.
    The stairs are a mess!!

  9. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm… disgusting… not even worth going to the gross mess this building is.

  10. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Tried to achieve a lot within a small site ….. han…..
    The circulation and planning is good !

    • Thumb up Thumb down 0

      We see a lot of efficient layouts.. I don’t think that is all that difficult a task.. What about Design Intelligence?

  11. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    I don’t understand either the whole negative reaction. This is not the best project of the world, but we’ve seen much worse… I think they really tried to achieve something (with more or less luck) like they say, between traditional and modern, and that effort, even if not succeded, is not totally without value…

  12. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    I have worked as an architect in India for a while and, believe me, this is “great architecture” for their standards. The kitsch look is just their taste, the awkward organization is meaningful to them since it respects some standards they have, and even exceeds at some point.
    Please let me suggest a reading of the house:
    The small size of the plot is due to its location: not far from Bangalore’s IT headquarters, ground is amazingly expensive there, skyrocketing at more than 100 times its price twenty years ago.
    Since the house owners are IT people, they may have chosen to spend some money in buying the plot because it settles their situation. The fact that the house has two spots for cars means that the owners are pretty rich. Presumably there will be only one car parked there (for now). The toilets at that floor will be used by the chauffeur, who may also live there in the garage, using a tap from the toilets to wash the car and the pavement in front of the house, and obviously, for his personal needs. The car cannot be parked in the street, being to precious to be left unatended.
    On the first floor, the entrance door does not face south, eventhough the main facade does. This means that the plot is not such a “good one”: It must have been cheaper than other orientations, because south-facing houses bring bad luck in the local beliefs. A door facing East is fine though. The bedroom is meant for the owner’s parents, who will also keep the house and make food for the couple. The kitchen is located north but open to the east, which respects the recommandations of Vaastu, the indian Feng-Shui equivalent (very hard to understand). The Puja-room (religious space) has a special decorative treatment, with a skylight that brings natural light.
    On the second floor, every room has a bathroom. This is a symbol of wealth. There is no bathtub because most people wash themselves with a bucket full of water. Every bathroom has a hole in the floor, to evacuate the water from the “shower”. Most of the time the shower is actually a regular tap.
    On the roof, the water tank is a common element (every house there has one), totally necessary because water is a scarce ressource there and water shortages are more than frequent. So everytime that the public pipes have water, a pump activates and fills the tank. The tank is also directly linked to a solar heater that works without electricity, warming up enough water for the family needs. What’s interesting is that their way to determinate how much water one needs leads to a ratio that is equivalent to the european average.

    All this being said, I personaly don’t like the general look of the building, and agree with almost every comment posted here. Indian designs always lack simplicity, and try to incorporate a “western-modern” touch that always results in a terrible building. The philosophy is just too different there… I would be glad to have your comments on all that.

    • Thumb up Thumb down +2

      ‘this is “great architecture” for their standards’, am not sure how much of indian architecture you’ve seen
      I wont even get into the history of building tradition and the typologies theve sprouted but even simple modernist work coming outta ahmedabad, pune, chennai and even bangalore…
      I would be a little more judicious in assigning generic attributes to the wide range of projects coming out of design studios in the country

Share your thoughts