House With One Wall

House with one wall
Architect Christian Kerez

Project House with one wall
Location Zurich, Switzerland
Date 2004 2007
Christian Kerez - House with one wall

Chstian Kerez seeks to create 'projects' by inventing
rules and constraints for activities in his day to day lile.
In this the architect manages his expectations as the
rules serve to generate unexpected, surprising outcomes
simultane ously avoiding mediocrity. Kerez gave an
example of one of these 'projects' while giving a
lecture at Harvard Uni versity in 2012, as the
arranging and composition of ftowers, whereby the
constraints may be given by the se lection of ftowers
available at a given shop or the arrange ment of ftowers
of certain, shapes sizes and colours.
Located in the Witikon borough in southwest Zurich,
this setting of rules can be seen in the reasoning
behind the concept of the house with one wall with
the argument that the base requirement in a building
which is to serve as two dwellings be a dividing wall.
Conventionally this pro vides no interaction or
expression in regards to function.
The struggle between this constraint or rule and the
design process generales conceptual clarification while
simultaneously reducing arbitrariness. The shape of the
wall is the reverse in one ftat to the other and so this
dual ity cannot accommodate arbitrary form. On the
one side convex, on the other concave. The shape
provides the structural rigidity reducing the architecture
to this one ele ment while providing the necessary
alcoves for the only enclosed spaces in the otherwise
open plan to create bathrooms. Even here, the
geometry of the wall is not in terrupted as the sliding
door clases off the alcove.
Fig 2 Entrance
Fig 3 Main Living Space
The services, circulation and structure are all dependan! on the dividing wall as it shifts from ftoor to ftoor,
alter ing the proportion in which the two dwellings open to their surroundings va the completely glazed
skin. The skin, which not only draws attention to the solidity of the central wall while increasing the
sense of space of the long open plan, also contrasts with the manner in which the building is rooted in
the landscape va the re cessed, enclosed, and prvate basement/ground ftoor level.
Fig 4 & 5 Context
At first the orientation of the building may seem strange in that the
di viding wall does not run north to south as one might expect.
Here one of the very few similarities between this and the
surrounding buildings becomes clear as conventional environmental
design gives way to the contextual response, opening vistas to Lake
Zurich for both dwellings .
The occupants interact on a daily basis with the land

scape as they move from the subterranean sheltered en
trance to the upper ftoors, with the basement walls
and glazing following the ground level of the sloping
site, va the linear progression of the three ftights of
stairs. The open plan multi-use spaces create large
generous areas for living on a narrow corner block site
with setback zoning.
Fig 6 Stair from Basement/ Entrance Level
Flg 7 : Rear View from Garden
r;1
Cross Section 1 200
Longitudinal Section 1 200
o
1
5
1
First floor 1 200
Gound floor 1 200
Basement/ entrancefloor 1 200
Structural/Topographical Model
The model demonstrates the contras! between the enclosed basement level and upper ftoors. No glue was
used to bond the upper ftoors to one another to demonstrate the structural stability of the shifting central
wall.
Figure 8 Analytical Model
By building into the slope and "in laying' the basement,

Kerez aknowledges the prehistory of the site.
"The bulldozing of an irregular topography into a ftat site is

clearly a technocratic gesture which aspires to a condition of
absolute p/ace/essness , whereas the terracing of the same
site to re ceive the stepped form of a building is an
engagement in the act of "cultivating" the site "
Frampton 1983, p. 26
Rather than ftattening to a level datum from which to build,

the gradient has been accepted into the design. This roots
the build ing and as the glazing is continued around the
perimiter where the building meets the ground, further
emphasises the solidity of the central wall. Here the tectonic
of the building is derived by re ducing the architecture into a
single element, where the central structure is explicitly
expressed in form as well as materiality.
At first the solution seems obvious, perhaps even too simple,
however the complexity can be found in the rigour of the
process and the theory of the approch.
By carefully analysing and distilling the requirements of the
build ing to a single element, kerez achieves a conceptual
clarity, which translates to the structure, spatial organisation and
contex tual response.
Exploded Axonometric 1 200

House With One Wall - Kerez

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

House With One Wall - Kerez

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

House With One Wall - Kerez

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Architect Christian Kerez

Christian Kerez - House with one wall

Fig 3 Main Living Space

Fig 4 & 5 Context

The occupants interact on a daily basis with the land

Fig 6 Stair from Basement/ Entrance Level

Flg 7 : Rear View from Garden

Cross Section 1 200

Longitudinal Section 1 200

First floor 1 200

Gound floor 1 200

Basement/ entrancefloor 1 200

Figure 8 Analytical Model

By building into the slope and "in laying' the basement,

"The bulldozing of an irregular topography into a ftat site is

Rather than ftattening to a level datum from which to build,

Exploded Axonometric 1 200

You might also like