Look: Modern Meets Victorian

Recent graduate of the USC School of Architecture Christopher Megowan sent us several images and a detailed description of an architectural project that juxtaposes a modern addition with a hundred year old Victoria home in the historical section near the Trojan campus for us to share. He wanted feedback about his first built project, so tell him what you think! Photos and details below...

"This project is a modern 1200 square foot addition onto the rear of a hundred year old Victorian home a block away from the University of Southern California. Over the years, the interior of the existing house had slowly been partitioned off to become a duplex with dormitory type accommodations for students. Programmatically, the new addition sought to add a large common social space as well as two extra bedrooms to each unit. In order to respect the proportions and architectural character of the Victorian, old and new were kept at bay by a five-foot wide clear polycarbonate annex which served to resolve all sectional circulation connections between old and new.

As the area surrounding the University becomes denser given the increase in demand for housing, many older homes are being demolished to make way for larger apartment blocks. In this scenario, this addition prevented the waste and demolition of the older house and reappropriated it's use to accommodate the areas demand for higher occupancy. Ultimately, it is greener to find creative ways to upgrade and reuse existing structures than to demolish and build new.

This project is owned and was developed by two students at the University of Southern California. Christopher Megowan, one of the two students/owners, designed the project while still studying at the School of Architecture. Purchased as a student housing investment, the addition was constructed on a tight budget at less than 130 dollars a square foot.

The addition was designed as efficiently as possible in order to not complicate construction and reduce material waste. Designed on materials grid, the main volume of the addition was detailed from the exterior 4'x8' fiber cement panels and polycarbonate in. Given the "urban" nature of the property and context in the rear (the addition is adjacent to parking and an alley), light and air were prioritized over a view. The design provides more evenly filtered natural light at a fraction of the price of glass. Further, in a neighborhood with bars over the windows of most homes, the polycarbonate provides much more security than glass. Light and air are separated into two functions as ventilation flaps seamlessly clad in the fiber cement panel and two operable skylights allow for air to pass through and promote passive ventilation.

The polycarbonate walls are wired in between studs to accommodate lighting that would allow for the walls to glow (the initial intent was that color changing LEDs would be placed between the studs to allow the walls to change color, however this solution proved too costly). In using the fiber cement panel rainscreen, thermally stabilizing concrete floors on the lower unit, and the polycarbonate, this addition was able to be constructed at a price per square foot competitive with stucco and other less desirable finishes.

The interior volumes benefit from tall ceilings and open spatial flow between the existing house, the annex and the common rooms of the addition. The bedrooms each have a wall of sliding doors providing privacy between spaces and enclosing the closets that serve as a sound barrier to the common spaces."

Christopher's work and contact info is available at his website.

Comments (17)

Nice, but I'd like to see how it works with the older home. As far as I can tell, the headline might as well be 'Modern Eats Victorian.'

Are they done building it? Whats with all the exposed framing?

This would have a WHOLE more more impact and I'd have a WHOLE lot more to say if there were photos of the actual contrast they're talking about. What Victorian? What older home? If the point of this project was to illustrate a contrast/meshing of old and new, why only photos of the new? Come on.

Many "older homes" in that area aren't up to earthquake code, and are poorly maintained. Since LA is pushing for higher density, I'm not so sure that these old houses (much as I personally like them) are going to make much sense. Maybe they can be moved.

This example looks awful, but maybe poor photography is at fault.

The idea is fine - but it's been done and overdone, and bears zero relationship with the original building (wherever that is)

I wouldnt' hire him to add to any house that I owned

"light and air were prioritized over a view. The design provides more evenly filtered natural light at a fraction of the price of glass"

I'm all for diffused light and all, but having no vision glazing in
a house wher I lived would make me feel a bit ("let me out of this box") claustrophobic!

Geez, you guys are harsh. You guys sound like my old studio critics who would tear apart my ill-conceived studio projects for fun and sport.

Let's cut these kids a break. It's noteworthy that they were able to complete there project so soon after school, a building they own no less. I bet they didn't expect this when they decided to share their work with you. No matter your opinion over the final outcome, let's at least respect the effort. The kids put months of their own time and money to put this together, and that I applaud even though it's not for me. Is Apartment Therapy, the place that blogs about nice wicker baskets, paint colors, Ikea hacks, etc., the appropriate place for an architectural smack-down? Why don't you head over to Curbed and comment there instead.

If you post your work on the Internet, expect a smack-down or six.

OK, here's some respect for the effort. *toss*

It's the outcome that was PUT HERE for critique. If they posted pictures and a journal about the design process and construction, that would be a chronicle of the EFFORT.

These pictures make it look horrid, and were poor choices to illustrate the narrative. I just see a mildly cool, run of the mill modernist box with slick surfaces. I do NOT see any clear photographic evidence of the contrast against an older or Victorian building that is mentioned. So what's been posted here on AT is fragmented, incomplete, and confusing, and that reflects poorly on these "kids" you think deserve a "break."

WHERE IS THE VICTORIAN PART?

The Internet is a tough place to come for critique. If you can't handle it, then don't post your stuff here asking for it!

Not my thing at all, but in fairness, the Victorians were all about wacky "modern" inventions. They'd probably have loved this.

Time after time I read these comments and time and time again I am amazed at how the veil of anonymity emboldens people to harshly criticize honest and sincere effort. There are two commentors above that I see often taking this liberty. Whatever your credentials are, to others on this forum, you may as well be the checker at the local Shop and Save. Unless you are willing to put your name, credentials, portfolios, and published work out to establish yourself as a critic, you just come off as mean. This is not a classroom, a studio, or an architectural journal. It is an informal setting in which to share ideas about design. It's been said before, and I will say it again. If you don't have anything nice to say...

the paint scheme looks like a cheap afterthought to break up a totally flat facade.

and what's with the hard to swallow write-up?

"thermally stabalizing concrete": would that be radiant floors? or is that a new fancy way of saying that residents can enjoy cold concrete floors?

"light and air were prioritized over a view": it doesn't even look like it meets LADBS minimums for natural ventilation. the interiors look dark and dreary. maybe the addition could have been oriented better to take advantage of natural light.

"constructed at a price per square foot competitive with stucco and other less desirable finishes": i'd take stucco over poorly detailed cementboard and Polygal with cheap stock trim.

"it is greener to find creative ways to upgrade and reuse existing structures than to demolish and build new": so you just built new and disregarded the existing structure? i mean with it doesn't exactly look like durable construction.

Agreed, the pics do kind of tell the story for we never see the actual Victorian in relation to the new structure. I'm all for reusing buildings for new purposes - especially in areas such as that section of LA. Too many times older buildings get torn down to make way for new, which is not thinking outside the box at all.

Here, I see a notable effort to reuse and add to an older structure with a new purpose but the problem here is the pics kind of show the new stucture, mostly it's exterior but little of the interior, nor any scale drawings of the floorplans or anything else. If some of you had read the article a little closer, they used a transparent annex like structure to mate the two units together and the idea here was nobile, to not try and just stick the two different designs together, but to integrate with a little space between the two so the disparity isn't so great, that I applaud, but i'd have loved to have seen how they did it and the studs you see are where they put the polycarbonate panels that let in light so in essence, it's finished.

In the end, the post left me wanting for a lot was not shown but simply described in text and it's not easy to conceptualize excactly how they accomplished this with just text, remember, a picture is worth a thousand words.

Wow! So strange. My girlfriend and I have been planning an addition for our tiny 671 sq ft house that was built in 1887 (it started off as a one room home, then had two addition put on it over the years, yet still only 671 sq ft), and many of the materials and even some of the design ideas are very similar to what I have come up with. It's nice to see that we are on the right track, even if ours will be quite a bit more modest all around.

I think this type of conversation is going to be constantly repeated on AT. It's a community made up of drastically different people. I was surprised when I first started reading AT at how many people seemed to disapprove of criticism. I myopically assume that these people have never been through a design program where they were exposed to repeated criticism. I just consider it part of the process. If Christopher Megowan has just finished an architecture program he'll be used to it to and should be able to defend his design without crying.

I'm more annoyed by comments like "What a cute kitty!" or even "I love it!" Neither of those comments adds anything to a discussion.

All that being said, when I read this post my first thought was "it must feel great to have a built project."

Now that's thinking outside of the box!

Funny thing about all the harsh comments; these are the same people complaining about the high cost of housing.

The nice thing about this is it is amazingly affordable. $130 a square foot is cheap, cheap, cheap. If these guys were about to build this, and the materials are half way decent and it is weather tight, CONGRATS.

You are never going to see Dwell stying at this kind of a price. NEVER. $300 is min. cost per square foot, EXCLUDING land and fees ...

I'd take this baby over a hefty mortgage any day.